91.185

Sidious

Sidious

Well-Known Member
Hey everybody, Reading 91.185 about lost comms in IMC I have a question about the clearance limit.

If you are cleared all the way to your destination airport then does that constitute the "fix from which an approach begins" And then just pick any approach you want once you get there?

Or would I revert to my last fix in the route part of my flight plan and use that?
I've received some input but Id like to see what everyone else has to say.

Thanks!
 
Once cleared to your destination, your cleared to shoot an approach of your choice into that airport, and you should try to arrive at your ETA as closely as possible.
 
I tend to agree with what Cameron said, but I think it's a bit more complicated.

I don't think the airport is a "fix from which an approach begins." It's the destination and I think that if you are are cleared to the destination airport that means onto the =ground= at the destination airport not overhead at some point in space that you might not even be able to identify.

So, I agree with Cameron that you fly to an approach fix, fly an approach, and land. But I think the "more complicated" is the "which approach and how do I get there?" part. If you look at routing portion of 91.185, there are multiple routings that depend on what is happening at the time you lost communications. To be consistent with 91.185, the approach you choose should be related to the applicable routing. That's why, for example, a lot of folks recommend always filing IFR to either an IAF or a fix that starts a feeder route in case you have to fall back on "originally filed" as your route choice. That's the problem with just "reverting" to what you filed - it may not fit in with the required 91.185 routing.

I'm not considering the "you don't really have to follow 91.185" answers that either take the view that (a) lost comm is always and emergency or (b) ATC just wants you out of their hair so, since you are under radar coverage, just land as soon as practical and ATC will keep everyone out of your way).
 
MidlifeFlyer said:
I tend to agree with what Cameron said, but I think it's a bit more complicated.

I don't think the airport is a "fix from which an approach begins." It's the destination and I think that if you are are cleared to the destination airport that means onto the =ground= at the destination airport not overhead at some point in space that you might not even be able to identify.

So, I agree with Cameron that you fly to an approach fix, fly an approach, and land. But I think the "more complicated" is the "which approach and how do I get there?" part. If you look at routing portion of 91.185, there are multiple routings that depend on what is happening at the time you lost communications. To be consistent with 91.185, the approach you choose should be related to the applicable routing. That's why, for example, a lot of folks recommend always filing IFR to either an IAF or a fix that starts a feeder route in case you have to fall back on "originally filed" as your route choice. That's the problem with just "reverting" to what you filed - it may not fit in with the required 91.185 routing.

I'm not considering the "you don't really have to follow 91.185" answers that either take the view that (a) lost comm is always and emergency or (b) ATC just wants you out of their hair so, since you are under radar coverage, just land as soon as practical and ATC will keep everyone out of your way).
Click to expand...

:yeahthat:

For that reason, Army pilots are required to file to a fix from which an approach begins.
 
I'm going to play devils advocate here.

The planning to a IAF or feeder still doesn't solve the problem of what to do when you get there. Say I file to KTOL from KMDW and I use Direct some IAF, Direct KTOL. ATC clears me "as filed", that means I am cleared to TOL via the route, not to TOL via direct the fix, the approach and then to TOL.

I realize that is splitting hairs but I think adding an IAF to the flight plan just adds another level of complexity that isn't necessary.
 
Maybe I'm not getting you, but if you filed:

Home Airport direct IAF direct destination...

And were "cleared as filed," wouldn't you be cleared, well, as filed? (Home Airport direct IAF direct destination)
 
Ian J said:
Maybe I'm not getting you, but if you filed:

Home Airport direct IAF direct destination...

And were "cleared as filed," wouldn't you be cleared, well, as filed? (Home Airport direct IAF direct destination)
Click to expand...


Exactly, you are cleared to the fix then to the airport (check the AFD almost every airport is defined by a radial and DME or some other method), you are not cleared to shoot the approach just because you filed the IAF as an intermediate fix.

All I am saying is cut out the middle man, file like you always do and if you loose comms go to an IAF, hold until your ETA or whatever you need and shoot the approach. Adding the IAF as a fix in your flight plan just adds another level of complexity (albeit not that complex) that just isn't needed and kind of gives people the wrong idea about what you are doing.
 
Kind of a caveat to this; what if you are XX distance from the airport and ATC gives you a vector to expect the ILS XX (which takes you off of your 'filed route') and you then lose your radios before receiving any other clearance. You can not intercept the LOC and shoot the ILS, am I right? What would you do given this situation? Hold at your clearance limit or destination IAF until the ETA then shoot the approach anyway?
 
E6BAV8R said:
Kind of a caveat to this; what if you are XX distance from the airport and ATC gives you a vector to expect the ILS XX (which takes you off of your 'filed route') and you then lose your radios before receiving any other clearance. You can not intercept the LOC and shoot the ILS, am I right? What would you do given this situation? Hold at your clearance limit or destination IAF until the ETA then shoot the approach anyway?
Click to expand...


91.185 says fly the Assigned, Vectored, Expecte, or Filed route. You were told to "Expect" vectors to the ILS. If you lost comms while on the vector, proceed to the IAF for that ILS and shoot it. Your ETA and such don't matter know, the expect vectors basically takes away any need to arive at a certain time.
 
Dugie8 said:
91.185 says fly the Assigned, Vectored, Expecte, or Filed route. You were told to "Expect" vectors to the ILS. If you lost comms while on the vector, proceed to the IAF for that ILS and shoot it. Your ETA and such don't matter know, the expect vectors basically takes away any need to arive at a certain time.
Click to expand...

I thought only cleared the approach or an EFC time would change the ETA time for arriving at the airport.
 
Dugie8 said:
91.185 says fly the Assigned, Vectored, Expecte, or Filed route. You were told to "Expect" vectors to the ILS. If you lost comms while on the vector, proceed to the IAF for that ILS and shoot it. Your ETA and such don't matter know, the expect vectors basically takes away any need to arive at a certain time.
Click to expand...


Ehhhh.... I dont agree with that one to much. It may be legal but is it smart? No. They vectored you for a reason and unless there is a dire reason to land, then I would go to that fix and hold until my ETA, then commence the approach.
 
Sidious said:
Ehhhh.... I dont agree with that one to much. It may be legal but is it smart? No. They vectored you for a reason and unless there is a dire reason to land, then I would go to that fix and hold until my ETA, then commence the approach.
Click to expand...

Ok, come on guys I know I am the resident ####### around here, but just disagreeing with me to disagree is getting old.

They vectored you, most likely to be aligned with the course, if there is a huge line of traffic you will probably know that and should be squawking 7600 right away (duh).

MOST of the time your vectors will be at or near the inbound altitude for the approach, so it is ok to hold at the IAF (usually the FAF) and just let traffic blunder into you and block up the entire airport or just turn to the IAF and do the full procedure while sqaukwing 7600.
 
Not disagreeing but you were not technically cleared for the approach. You will be expecting the approach but I don't see where you would be able to continue inbound. If you could provide a source from the FARs or the AIM then I will believe you.
 
Cessnaflyer said:
Not disagreeing but you were not technically cleared for the approach. You will be expecting the approach but I don't see where you would be able to continue inbound. If you could provide a source from the FARs or the AIM then I will believe you.
Click to expand...


91.185 is the source, Expect vectors is the "clearance".
 
I actually got asked this question on my instrument checkride. My examiner explained it this way. If you lost comms and you were cleared to the airport and you are going to arrive 20 minutes before eta, you are expected to hold at the IAF until the ETA and then shoot the approach. This is all assuming of course that you stayed in IMC the whole time.

BTW real worlds situatio and i was getting vectored to final but not yet cleared for the approach? If i were in IMC and I very likely lost some electrical also I would continue on and shoot the approach Maybe not strictly by the rules but all things considered probably the safest option

Jason
 
This is what I don't understand, how is everyone(s) ETAs always so far off? I don't think I have ever done a flight that has me over the ETE by more or less than a couple of minutes, minus the big storms or holding enroute etc. If you are off that much (20 minutes!) time to refigure how you do your planning.
 
If we all disagree, you can imagine controllers disagree among themselves about the same thing. What I would like to know is whichever way you decide to go, would they consider it an emergency and give you a pass?
 
Dugie8 said:
91.185 is the source, Expect vectors is the "clearance".
Click to expand...

I see. I always think of those in a situation of being in the enroute phase and not the approach segments. I still think I would hold at the IAF because of past experiences with being stuck in a stack over the IAF here at school many times before. I don't know if I would like to start meandering my way through all the approach corridors with aircraft coming through them.
 
Dugie8 said:
This is what I don't understand, how is everyone(s) ETAs always so far off? I don't think I have ever done a flight that has me over the ETE by more or less than a couple of minutes, minus the big storms or holding enroute etc. If you are off that much (20 minutes!) time to refigure how you do your planning.
Click to expand...

Haha true the most I've ever been off was 10 minutes and that was on my commercial long.
 
And I believe that is why its written in such a way. To allow each situation to be determined by the PIC and the given facts at the time.

But.... I think its the consensus here that if you're CAF then you should pick a fix from which you are approaching and you should pick which ever route makes the most sense at the time. As crazy as lost comms probably would be, the best and legal route will present itself.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top