VFR into a class E extension airport when primary airport is IFR?

S

smig

Well-Known Member
Help settle a debate. Look at skyvector and find KPOU airport. Inside the class E extension for KPOU is 44N, an uncontrolled field with no weather reporting.

https://skyvector.com/

Scenario: There is a patch of fog at KPOU, they are IFR with 1/2 mile visibility. Everywhere else is VFR including 44N airport. Can you legally takeoff and/or land from 44N based on flight visibility with KPOU being IFR?
 
smig said:
Help settle a debate. Look at skyvector and find KPOU airport. Inside the class E extension for KPOU is 44N, an uncontrolled field with no weather reporting.

https://skyvector.com/

Scenario: There is a patch of fog at KPOU, they are IFR with 1/2 mile visibility. Everywhere else is VFR including 44N airport. Can you legally takeoff and/or land from 44N based on flight visibility with KPOU being IFR?
Click to expand...
Depends, is anyone gonna snitch on you?

And remember, snitches get stitches.
 
Looking at the AFD, it’s always either D or E to the surface. You just have to have to Class E weather mins at that airport, but to go to POU you’d need a special VFR clearance and, at 1/2 sm vis, you wouldn’t get it. You’d have to remain clear of that airspace.

Another way to look at it: who are you told to contact for clearance delivery? POU has no control.
 
Last edited:
deadstick said:
Looking at the AFD, it’s always either D or E to the surface. You just have to have to Class E weather mins at that airport, but to go to POU you’d need a special VFR clearance and, at 1/2 sm vis, you wouldn’t get it. You’d have to remain clear of that airspace.
Click to expand...
No, if it's fog he can fly over it in that airspace. Without a special.
 
Good question. Found an interesting thread on another forum on this topic:
https://www.airwarriors.com/communi...urface-area-extension-to-airport.23416/page-4

The tower at Palomar (CRQ) was denying VFR aircraft entry into the Class E surface area protecting the ILS approach when the airport was IMC due to the "marine layer" advection fog which comes from the pacific ocean just west of the airport. However the Class E surface area just east of the Class D was completely clear and unlimited.

Ultimately it comes down to FAR Part 91. There is no communication requirement for VFR in Class E, and the VFR weather minimums prescribed for Class E airspace exist to give approaching IFR and non-participating VFR traffic time to see and avoid each other when the IFR aircraft breaks out of the clouds.

In the original thread, the confusion came from some LOA between CRQ Tower and Socal TRACON about which facility "owned" the class E extension and the misunderstanding snowballed. Apparently the OP contacted someone at the FAA who re-educated the controllers and everyone lived happily ever after. :)
 
Can you ensure adequate flight visibility and cloud clearance at the satellite field for the airspace depicted? Note that part 91 VFR you "ensure" with the Mk. 1 eyeballs.
 
MidlifeFlyer said:
Practicing pattern work at 44N in a Piper Cub with no radio with the weather clear and a million at 44N, why would I care or even know about fog at KPOU?

Im not sure I understand the argument.
Click to expand...

Quoted for "shoulda been the only answer in the thread".

You don't even need a radio or transponder much less an IFR clearance.
 
z987k said:
Not under 91. 91 is always flight vis. Even for an approach.
Click to expand...


Not for getting special vfr.

91.157c1
(c) No person may take off or land an aircraft (other than a helicopter) under special VFR—

(1) Unless ground visibility is at least 1 statute mile; or
Click to expand...

It looks like the caveat of 157c2 (that allows the pilot to determine vis) would be in the case of getting a SVFR clearance at 44N where there is no wx reporting.
 
deadstick said:
It looks like the caveat of 157c2 (that allows the pilot to determine vis) would be in the case of getting a SVFR clearance at 44N where there is no wx reporting.
Click to expand...

I may have missed a thread/fork in the discussion....but if 44N is VFR (as in the original post) why would he call for SVFR anywhere?
 
killbilly said:
I may have missed a thread/fork in the discussion....but if 44N is VFR (as in the original post) why would he call for SVFR anywhere?
Click to expand...

I think maybe transiting the delta. People got seriously wrapped around the axle on this one.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
z987k said:
Not under 91. 91 is always flight vis. Even for an approach.
Click to expand...

Not according to this legal interpretation...
https://www.faa.gov/about/office_or...12/baginski - (2012) legal interpretation.pdf

According to that interpretation, takeoff/landing at a primary airport would require the reported visibility to be VFR.

As far as my original question, I agree with all those who said landing at the satelitte airport is legal based on flight visibility. This was a debate I walked into at my local airport and I stated why I thought it was legal and then showed the regs. Some of the guys were still disagreeing with me and saying once the primary airport goes IFR, the entire airspace goes IFR including airports in the satellite area.
 
smig said:
Help settle a debate. Look at skyvector and find KPOU airport. Inside the class E extension for KPOU is 44N, an uncontrolled field with no weather reporting.

https://skyvector.com/

Scenario: There is a patch of fog at KPOU, they are IFR with 1/2 mile visibility. Everywhere else is VFR including 44N airport. Can you legally takeoff and/or land from 44N based on flight visibility with KPOU being IFR?
Click to expand...

Derg said:
Hillary had a private email server!

Oh, wait. LOL!
Click to expand...

Since 44N has no weather observation (ATIS, AWOS, ASOS) how would you know the conditions ? - Through a local PIREP. If human observation says it is VFR at 44N, why worry about the other airports in the area?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top