Mooney 201 lands on high power lines in MD

[ilovecornfields]

1 hour ago, 201er said:

ATC has never granted a Contact Approach when I’ve asked.

They talk about that on the Opposing Bases podcast. Apparently a lot of controllers aren’t familiar with it. There’s a story of a pilot requesting a contact approach and after a long pause the controller replies “contact approach on 124.3.” I think @EricJ may have been speaking from experience.

[bradp]

5 hours ago, Ibra said:

He was likely very low under 700ft agl flying in uncontrolled Golf airspace and going to non towered airport, why he would need ATC clearance for that flying? he was likely on CTAF frequency bellow radio/radar reception coverage: ATC tends to give up on anyone going low like that, on this occasion, they called for “low alert” but no answer…

https://www.law.cornell.edu/cfr/text/14/91.173

If he was in controlled airspace with Approach (or final with Tower), he will need contact clearance but I highly doubt “IFR contact approaches” (ground in sight?) are allowed at night with ATC? what about “IFR visual approaches” (airport in sight?) at night with ATC?

By day, 1 1/4 visibility & clear of clouds flying under 700ft/1200ft he could even call that (scud run) VFR: no clearance and no flight plan, by night, I would expect that would becomes 3nm visibility on higher ceiling minima? 

I gather this “ground contact business” tend requires more skills & luck than proper IFR on procedures to DA & MDA? life expectancy shrinks exponentially bellow DA & MDA on procedure at 0.5nm from runway let alone 3nm away on freestyle navigation, the most easy & obvious way to avoid ground & trees is to fly up away from them in clouds not go down to have a closer look

The pilot likely saw the ground on short final, this happens often at night in marginal weather with layered clouds, that does not mean he should go for it? ground under with no runway ahead: run to hide into clouds !

 

 

He violated 91.119 regardless of the class airspace he was flying in. 
 

Maybe a question for @midlifeflyer- can a PIC (outside of 91.13) change an approach once he/she has been cleared for an approach? It would seem straightforward to be able to select localizer minimums once cleared for an ILS approach - but anything else would seem a violation of 91.123 as well. 

[midlifeflyer]

2 hours ago, bradp said:

He violated 91.119 regardless of the class airspace he was flying in. 
 

Maybe a question for @midlifeflyer- can a PIC (outside of 91.13) change an approach once he/she has been cleared for an approach? It would seem straightforward to be able to select localizer minimums once cleared for an ILS approach - but anything else would seem a violation of 91.123 as well. 

Change it to what? @Ibra's post you responded to saud he was below 700 AGL? What published approach starts there? Remember that while IFR flight without a clearance us technically legal, 91.175(a) says we "must use a standard instrument approach procedure prescribed in part 97 of this chapter for that airport" when we need to do an instrument approach. The rules about approaches and landings under IFR in 91.175 apply in bot controlled and uncontrolled airspace.

but I might be misunderstanding the question .

[bradp]

1 hour ago, midlifeflyer said:

Change it to what? @Ibra's post you responded to saud he was below 700 AGL? What published approach starts there? Remember that while IFR flight without a clearance us technically legal, 91.175(a) says we "must use a standard instrument approach procedure prescribed in part 97 of this chapter for that airport" when we need to do an instrument approach. The rules about approaches and landings under IFR in 91.175 apply in bot controlled and uncontrolled airspace.

but I might be misunderstanding the question .

Thanks Mark- that is good information regardless.  I was thinking more hypothetically and should have been clearer in my question.  Let’s say he he was cleared for the RNAV 14 and there was also an ILS-Z 14 at GAI.  He then has a loss of RAIM on the RNAV (or similar) and the localized backed up.  He can’t (legally) decide “hey I’m flying the ILS instead now”.  The proper thing to do in that circumstance outside of an emergency (91.13) would be to go missed, notify ATC and give resequenced for the ILS.  
 

In the hypothetical presented by Ibra, he can’t dip legally below mins on an approach (91.175(c) and 91.123 and 91.119) with the reasoning of “well in now in class G and on a contact approach”.  He was only cleared for the RNAV 14 by ATC. 

[Ibra]

4 hours ago, bradp said:

Let’s say he he was cleared for the RNAV 14 and there was also an ILS-Z 14 at GAI.  He then has a loss of RAIM on the RNAV (or similar) and the localized backed up.  He can’t (legally) decide “hey I’m flying the ILS instead now”.  The proper thing to do in that circumstance outside of an emergency (91.13) would be to go missed, notify ATC and give resequenced for the ILS.

Aside from technicalities, it's an interesting question (especially with ground in-sight toward untowred airport under 700/1200 airspace)

For 3D/2D short final: my understanding you can degrade from ILS min to LOC min on losing GP, you can degrade to LNAV from LPV (only above 1000ft agl?), you can pick CDFA or DnD profile...you don't need any ATC clearance for these, funnily, that may allow lower 2D minima than 3D, very uunusual but happens there is a pylon that kink into 3D DA survey surface but not 2D MDA survey surface, am I feeling lucky today? 

Near "airport area", my understanding you can't degrade from instrument circling into visual pattern: you are prohibited CTL without explicit ATC clearance even with ground in sight, 1/ if you having circling clearance you can't join visual pattern outside circling protection and 2/ you can't descend bellow CTL MDA without identifying non-ILS end threshold and being able to reach it with stable approach 

Now can one legally degrade GPS or ILS into IFR contact/visual or VFR join, I have no idea? in one hand, 91.175 does enforce being on the published standard procedure (even for Golf), also enforces approach weather minima to instrument runways even in non-towred airport...in the other hand, one can't decend bellow DA/MDA unless few conditions are met 

Let say you lose GPS, CAVOK day, short final LPV to untowred airport on CTAF frequency, can I fly using ground features? or I have to go missed and ask for another approach? 

There are likely other caveats regarding planning minima and missed procedure...

Edited December 9, 2022 by Ibra

[midlifeflyer]

The technicalities are kind of an interesting academic exercise. But once we start changing approaches midstream there are some practicalities at work too. I think the answer to the ILS vs LOC or LPV vs LNAV question is that ATC clears you for an approach, not the minimums. I think the answer to 

3 hours ago, Ibra said:

say you lose GPS, CAVOK day, short final LPV to untowred airport on CTAF frequency, can I fly using ground features? or I have to go missed and ask for another approach? 

is, you should have canceled IFR   Alternatively, consider yourself circling.

When it comes to contact approaches, I think we are in a different ballpark altogether. I've never delved deeply into the question so this is a FWIW, but I think contact approaches are what 91.175(a) refers to as a non-SIAP "otherwise authorized by the FAA." As such, you have to meet all requirements for it, including the requirement that ATC clears you for it. I dint think there is such a thing as a pilot-created or pilot self-cleared contact approach.

[Ibra]

35 minutes ago, midlifeflyer said:

is, you should have canceled IFR   Alternatively, consider yourself circling.

On CTAF no TWR in CAVOK, I can but no one around to take note, "cancel at xx:yy" 

In the other hand, contact or visual approaches are odd ones, few conditions need to be met at IF/FAF and ATC need to clear for it from there, it's unlikely that PIC can self switch to it half-way after ground in sight?

These go horribly wrong by daylight in sunny blue sky at 2000ft agl, let alone at 100ft agl at night with low weather...

https://www.aviation24.be/airlines/air-france-klm-group/air-france/twice-in-a-week-a-commercial-airline-approaches-for-landivisiau-naval-air-base-but-destination-is-brest-airport/

[rbp]

to everyone still paying attention, I was joking about the contact approach! 

[midlifeflyer]

2 minutes ago, Ibra said:

On CTAF no TWR in CAVOK, I can but no one around to take note, "cancel at xx:yy" 

 I meant while you are still talking to ATC, not via a transmission in the blind on CTAF. You haven't canceled until ATC acknowledges it,

My latest game is to try to save an extra transmission by cancelling before ATC clears me for the approach (when conditions permit) and avoid the common dialog,

Me: Airport in sight. 

ATC: Cleared visual approach. 

Me: Cancel IFR.

 

[midlifeflyer]

1 minute ago, rbp said:

to everyone still paying attention, I was joking about the contact approach! 

Well, he did "contact tower" after all.

[rbp]

14 minutes ago, midlifeflyer said:

My latest game is to try to save an extra transmission by cancelling before ATC clears me for the approach (when conditions permit) and avoid the common dialog,

 

here's what that looks like

Me: Airport in sight. we can cancel IFR at this time.

ATC: You wanna cancel?

Me: Yes, cancel IFR

ATC: IFR cancellation received. squawk VFR. Frequency  change approved. HAVE A NICE DAY

 

[midlifeflyer]

2 hours ago, rbp said:

here's what that looks like

Me: Airport in sight. we can cancel IFR at this time.

ATC: You wanna cancel?

Me: Yes, cancel IFR

ATC: IFR cancellation received. squawk VFR. Frequency  change approved. HAVE A NICE DAY

 

Pretty much mine but without the extra dialog

Me: Airport in sight. Cancel IFR.

ATC: IFR cancellation received. squawk VFR. Frequency  change approved. HAVE A NICE DAY

Edited December 9, 2022 by midlifeflyer

[Hank]

2 hours ago, midlifeflyer said:

Pretty much mine but without the extra dialog

Me: Airport in sight. Cancel IFR.

ATC: IFR cancellation received. squawk VFR. Frequency  change approved. HAVE A NICE DAY

Ya'll don't get the normal "no observed traffic between you and the field" between "Freq change approved" and "Have a nice day"?

[Marauder]

Ya'll don't get the normal "no observed traffic between you and the field" between "Freq change approved" and "Have a nice day"?

We get "Thank God, we thought you would never cancel". We call Jersey Love.

[MikeOH]

9 hours ago, midlifeflyer said:

Pretty much mine but without the extra dialog

Me: Airport in sight. Cancel IFR.

ATC: IFR cancellation received. squawk VFR. Frequency  change approved. HAVE A NICE DAY

You know you can save three additional words...

You: Cancel IFR

At that point, I doubt ATC cares a whit whether you have the airport in sight

[ilovecornfields]

I’ve heard controllers say the visual approach is the easiest but today I got cleared for my RNAV approach 30 miles south of the IF (which I had been direct to for half an hour). Can imagine it gets any easier than that.

[Jerry 5TJ]

17 hours ago, Marauder said:

19 hours ago, Hank said:

Ya'll don't get the normal "no observed traffic between you and the field" between "Freq change approved" and "Have a nice day"?

We get "Thank God, we thought you would never cancel". We call Jersey Love.

Yep.

Decades ago in my M20E flying IFR into Linden NJ on the (then) VOR approach in thick summer haze I couldn’t spot the field as an increasingly irate NY Approach controller counted down the distance, finally ending with “Linden is 1 mile 12 o’clock and we’re holding all the departures at Newark for you!!!”   I spotted the field and landed, to the clear relief of ATC.  

Later I realized that the MAP would have taken me directly to Newark airport.   

[midlifeflyer]

16 hours ago, MikeOH said:

You know you can save three additional words...

You: Cancel IFR

At that point, I doubt ATC cares a whit whether you have the airport in sight

I could but choose not to.  

[midlifeflyer]

10 hours ago, ilovecornfields said:

I’ve heard controllers say the visual approach is the easiest but today I got cleared for my RNAV approach 30 miles south of the IF (which I had been direct to for half an hour). Can imagine it gets any easier than that.

Controllers are learning to love RNAC approaches for that reason. You are own nav after that.

[midlifeflyer]

22 hours ago, Hank said:

Ya'll don't get the normal "no observed traffic between you and the field" between "Freq change approved" and "Have a nice day"?

I've gotten the opposite. after acknowledging cancellation, "Stay with me for a while longer."

[PT20J]

19 hours ago, ilovecornfields said:

I’ve heard controllers say the visual approach is the easiest but today I got cleared for my RNAV approach 30 miles south of the IF (which I had been direct to for half an hour). Can imagine it gets any easier than that.

Enroute from Merrill Field in Anchorage, AK to Kodiak. Upon hand off from Anchorage approach to Anchorage center got "cleared to cruise six thousand."

[ilovecornfields]

4 hours ago, PT20J said:

Enroute from Merrill Field in Anchorage, AK to Kodiak. Upon hand off from Anchorage approach to Anchorage center got "cleared to cruise six thousand."

I’ve never asked for or received a cruise clearance. I think I’d probably have to look it up on my FAR/AIM app just to make sure I wasn’t screwing something up.

[midlifeflyer]

6 hours ago, ilovecornfields said:

I’ve never asked for or received a cruise clearance. I think I’d probably have to look it up on my FAR/AIM app just to make sure I wasn’t screwing something up.

Chances are good controller would too.

[rbp]

23 hours ago, midlifeflyer said:

I've gotten the opposite. after acknowledging cancellation, "Stay with me for a while longer."

this is the controller you want

[rbp]

3 hours ago, midlifeflyer said:

Chances are good controller would too.

I looked it up too 

https://www.boldmethod.com/learn-to-fly/regulations/ifr-cruise-clearance-how-to-fly-with-it/