91.185

Cessnaflyer said:
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.
Click to expand...


I can honestly say, outside the training enviroment, I have never done an approach from a holding stack.

Don't over complicate this either, while I am not one for "that will never happen" thinking, trying to come up with a plan for lost comms for every conceivable situation is like trying to get a fat chick to put down the ice cream; dangerous! Apply AVE-F and MEA to your route and altitude, don't be afraid to squawk 7600 as soon as you think comms are lost and look for the VFR conditions.
 
Dugie8 said:
I can honestly say, outside the training enviroment, I have never done an approach from a holding stack.

Don't over complicate this either, while I am not one for "that will never happen" thinking, trying to come up with a plan for lost comms for every conceivable situation is like trying to get a fat chick to put down the ice cream; dangerous! Apply AVE-F and MEA to your route and altitude, don't be afraid to squawk 7600 as soon as you think comms are lost and look for the VFR conditions.
Click to expand...

Mine have been training situations but we did not request the hold on either of these instances. The weather suddenly took a dump and there was one 747, two 737's and a C-17 that had to get down also. In that situation I would have entered the hold over the LOM at my assigned altitude and then descended when my ETA time approaches.
 
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...
Not necessarily. In some cases we file a route and get something completely different.

If you have access to it, consider a flight from Centennial(KAPA), south of KDEN to say, Goodland, KS (KGLD). I know I'm going to get the Plains departure SID, so the planned route (in case of lost comm) will include the lost comm fix which, in reality, I know I will never get near. With perfect planning and winds exactly as predicted, the "planned" time and the "real" (radar vectored) time will be different by a good 10-20 minutes in a slower GA aircraft.

I guess the answer could be to use your estimate of the "real" (short) time for your ETA instead of the "planned" (longer) time.
 
Hernandezcfi said:
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?
Click to expand...
Consider an unexplained loss of communications that you have figured out was related to your aircraft rather than a general ATC outage. In the absence of troubleshooting that it was otherwise, wouldn't you be concerned that it was more systemic than just affecting your comm radios?
 
It's the IAF of your choice.

Let's get even deeper.

Let's say you have an IFR flight plan on file from Fort Pierce, FL (KFPR) to Elmira, New York (KELM) and you hear this clearance...

"Colgan 4881's cleared to the BAIRN intersection, via Radar Vectors, Vero Beach, V3. Maintain 5000, expect FL210, 10 minutes after departure. Departure frequency 132.25, squawk 0416."

Well his clearance limit is the BAIRN intersection. Assuming radio failure...what's next?
 
SmitteyB said:
It's the IAF of your choice.

Let's get even deeper.

Let's say you have an IFR flight plan on file from Fort Pierce, FL (KFPR) to Elmira, New York (KELM) and you hear this clearance...

"Colgan 4881's cleared to the BAIRN intersection, via Radar Vectors, Vero Beach, V3. Maintain 5000, expect FL210, 10 minutes after departure. Departure frequency 132.25, squawk 0416."

Well his clearance limit is the BAIRN intersection. Assuming radio failure...what's next?
Click to expand...

Good question.....his clearance limit is not the KELM IAF.....but an intersection.

You got me on this one!!!
 
Squack 7600 and fly whatever makes most sense to you. If you are in the soup and possibly haven't gotten your ATIS yet the I would fly the approach with the lowest minimums and if the FAA got pissed I would have said that I felt it was the safest thing to do. If you are unfamiliar with an airport in IMC and loose coms thats a bonafide emergency. Do what you can to get the plane down the safest possible way.

Heres something to think about what if you loose coms and navs / or complete power failure under the same circumstances. Not fun...
:yup:
 
i tried to read all the replies, but i'm running short of time to get to the airport for a lesson myself..

let's start with the basics. your eta all this lost comm is based upon is the time you calculate when you take your actual time off that you should have written down and add the time you estimated on your flight plan. ok, now you have a time.

you've lost comm. no emergency. easy. squawk 7600 and fly either your flight plan or clearance received on the ground (if lost before comm established upon take-off). a vector clearance should be one given to a navaid, such as 'fly heading ___, direct ___ vor when able'. the heading will eventually get you within the service volume range of that vor..now you are direct to it.

arrival at your destination, you are priority (unless another aircraft has declared an emergency). atc will protect ALL iaf's for every approach at the airport, but they expect you'll select the most logical based upon choice of precison vs. non-precision and direction of winds, and assuming an approach isn't notam'd out of service. if you arrive early, proceed to any iaf of your choice from either your route or vector clearance..there will be a protected route, i assure you. enter a standard hold and remain at that altitude until your eta. next, commence a descent in holding down to the published numbers, which allow you to commence the approach, fly it and land. if you arrive late based on your eta, immediately descend in holding at that fix to the published numbers, fly approach and land.

here's a thought for you folks. what if you shoot the approach non-comm..and have to miss because you don't meet the part 91 requirements for descent below dh/mda due to ceiling/visibility? ;) let's hear your replies.
 
exleardriver said:
here's a thought for you folks. what if you shoot the approach non-comm..and have to miss because you don't meet the part 91 requirements for descent below dh/mda due to ceiling/visibility? ;) let's hear your replies.
Click to expand...

It depends on the situation. If I've only lost my comm radio, and was sure that was the only thing, I'd probably go missed and try the approach again. However, if there were other variables involved, which most likely there are probably going to be, I'd asses the situation.

Most likely, a comm failure isn't going to be isolated. Personally, I've never seen just a comm radio fail, but I have personally had five alternator failures in my time as a pilot. If I knew that there were no VFR conditions nearby, I'd probably consider that an emergency and deviate from the minimums instead of chance loosing my power on a second approach. Also, fuel status, etc. all plays into it. Again, the type of approach is a factor too. An ILS would be easier to deviate on the DA than say a VOR A approach.

By the way, since we're all playing the devil's advocate here, I've got one for you. Let say you're cleared to an airport that has a "Radar required" approach only, and you're in IMC and lose comms. The only way to get to the IAF is vectors. Assuming you didn't need an alternate filed, now where do you go? ;)
 
exleardriver said:
here's a thought for you folks. what if you shoot the approach non-comm..and have to miss because you don't meet the part 91 requirements for descent below dh/mda due to ceiling/visibility? ;) let's hear your replies.
Click to expand...

My $.02 is that if you were unable to shoot the approach, then ATC would expect you to divert to your alternate upon reaching the fix for the missed.
 
SmitteyB said:
It's the IAF of your choice.

Let's get even deeper.

Let's say you have an IFR flight plan on file from Fort Pierce, FL (KFPR) to Elmira, New York (KELM) and you hear this clearance...

"Colgan 4881's cleared to the BAIRN intersection, via Radar Vectors, Vero Beach, V3. Maintain 5000, expect FL210, 10 minutes after departure. Departure frequency 132.25, squawk 0416."

Well his clearance limit is the BAIRN intersection. Assuming radio failure...what's next?
Click to expand...
Just continue as filed?
 
It depends on the situation. If I've only lost my comm radio, and was sure that was the only thing, I'd probably go missed and try the approach again. However, if there were other variables involved, which most likely there are probably going to be, I'd asses the situation.

Most likely, a comm failure isn't going to be isolated. Personally, I've never seen just a comm radio fail, but I have personally had five alternator failures in my time as a pilot. If I knew that there were no VFR conditions nearby, I'd probably consider that an emergency and deviate from the minimums instead of chance loosing my power on a second approach. Also, fuel status, etc. all plays into it. Again, the type of approach is a factor too. An ILS would be easier to deviate on the DA than say a VOR A approach.
Click to expand...
good argument for always carrying a handheld comm first of all, eh? ;) i'd say that if you missed on the first attempt due to not meeting the landing requirements, you'd miss again. proceed to your filed alternate..the weather is forecast to be better than your destination. atc will be protecting the airspace around you and note that you're routing there via appropriate airways/gps or direct the navaid if within the usable service volume. select the appropriate approach at your alternate, fly it and land. this is a rare occurrence, fortunately, but still no emergency. i wouldn't go below minimums. short of being able to land at the alternate as well (highly improbable), you're required to know the direction to nearest vfr weather. that's why you'll be carrying additional fuel to go beyond your alternate. get to vfr conditions, land and cancel.

My $.02 is that if you were unable to shoot the approach, then ATC would expect you to divert to your alternate upon reaching the fix for the missed.
Click to expand...
yes, as described above. miss the approach at the primary, your safest option is to divert to your alternate. the weather isn't likely to change that quickly at your primary destination..that cannot be depended upon.

Let's get even deeper.

Let's say you have an IFR flight plan on file from Fort Pierce, FL (KFPR) to Elmira, New York (KELM) and you hear this clearance...

"Colgan 4881's cleared to the BAIRN intersection, via Radar Vectors, Vero Beach, V3. Maintain 5000, expect FL210, 10 minutes after departure. Departure frequency 132.25, squawk 0416."

Well his clearance limit is the BAIRN intersection. Assuming radio failure...what's next?
Click to expand...
is bairn a feeder fix on a sid or a star? i don't have access to my terps. and what suffix if the aircraft filed under? if it's a star feeder fix, then it's my holding fix until my eta if i arrive early, then i'll proceed to the iaf of my choice, descend in holding from fl210 - 91.185(c)(3)(ii) - until established on the published portion of the approach of my choice, fly the approach and land if landing requirements per 91.175(c) are met.
 
exleardriver said:
proceed to your filed alternate..the weather is forecast to be better than your destination.
Click to expand...
I guess the question becomes when the lost comm took place. If I had more updated information than I had when planning the flight and choosing my fuel alternate, it might tell me that the weather at the alternate was not that good.

The interesting thing is that 91.185 doesn't give you any guidance on what to do on the missed, so the answer is punt. Recognizing the reality of radar and that you are likely to be at least a primary target, I'd say do what you think is best under the existing circumstances.
 
midlife, i concur that 91.185 doesn't provide anything in the way of direct guidelines should one miss the approach per not being able to meet the landing requirements of 91.175(c). i interpret 91.167(a) to mean i should carry sufficient fuel to miss the destination approach, even possibly the alternate approach, but then have 45 minutes to 'find vfr weather'. most examiners i've spoken with agree..they love this kinda stuff.. ;)
 
I agree with your interpretation on 91.167 as to the amount of fuel you must carry. In fact, I don't think an interpretation on that point is necessary. "Complete the flight to the first airport of intended landing...fly from that airport to the alternate airport; and ... Fly after that for 45 minutes at normal cruising speed..." is pretty clear.

But 91.167 is a regulation that sets minimum requirements for what is "enough fuel." It's not a directive on where to go and I would disagree that anything in 91.167 (or any other regulation) requires you to actually go to the planned alternate under any circumstances (or to fly there at normal cruising speed).
 
But 91.167 is a regulation that sets minimum requirements for what is "enough fuel." It's not a directive on where to go and I would disagree that anything in 91.167 (or any other regulation) requires you to actually go to the planned alternate under any circumstances (or to fly there at normal cruising speed).
Click to expand...

midlife, i concur on that point as well..solely how i would choose to act in those circumstances, assuming lost comm. fly to destination, miss..fly to alternate, miss (highly improbable)..fly to nearest vfr conditions with my '45' of fuel reserve..not as a directive. there's undoubtedly some aviation legal precedent/interpretation on best course of action. but i agree absolutley - nothing in 91.167 suggests a course of action, i simply interpret that perhaps the rationale is to have enough fuel if the flight cannot be completed as planned. knowing where the nearest vfr weather is along the lines of 91.103. i think we agree that there's no reg that specifies in plain language what to do in this case..but knowing where the nearest vfr weather is is a requirement. it's your last option. i'd pass on others' suggestions to go below minimums. :bandit:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top