IFR in Class G airpace

[aterpster]

Based on the particular set of actions by that pilot that day and the BS story he created to talk his way out of a violation, I would not derive a general prohibition against instrument flight in 'high G' from that NTSB decision.

I don't believe there would have been an enforcement action had he departed in an area where the base of controlled airspace is well above an altitude where he could climb to and level off at a legal IFR altitude.

The issue here is you cannot do that in a 700-foot transition area.

 

[Gary F]

I still disagree, especially on maters where regulations and legality are being considered. Can you try to be a little less condescending?

Only if you try to do your own research instead of using me as a human Google machine.

I'll take that as a "no". OK, I beseech you to be a teeny weeny less contemptuous of my questions.

Nobody forced you to participate in this thread so stop whining about being used. I am trying to learn something.

 

[weilke]

I don't believe there would have been an enforcement action had he departed in an area where the base of controlled airspace is well above an altitude where he could climb to and level off at a legal IFR altitude.

The issue here is you cannot do that in a 700-foot transition area.

Agreed.

This guy got violated because he was too impatient to wait for his release and decided to blast off into the murk. When someone complained, he tried to create a story using the IFR in class G as an excuse.

If someone in eastern montana takes off from his ranch strip, climbs through a layer and and either picks up a clearance in the air or continues his flight VFR above the layer, I believe that is not only legal but that the chance of getting a violation for it are rather remote.

 

[poadeleted20]

This guy got violated because he was too impatient to wait for his release and decided to blast off into the murk. When someone complained, he tried to create a story using the IFR in class G as an excuse.

I think that's reasonably accurate.

If someone in eastern montana takes off from his ranch strip, climbs through a layer and and either picks up a clearance in the air or continues his flight VFR above the layer, I believe that is not only legal but that the chance of getting a violation for it are rather remote.

If that's done in one of those big brown areas, I agree.

 

[olasek]

Nobody forced you to participate in this thread so stop whining about being used. I am trying to learn something.

You are trying to learn but you seem to disagree with whatever Ron writes, strange way of learning. I myself am learning a lot from Ron's answers (not only in this thread), he writes clearly, convincingly and calmly and there was absolutely nothing condescending in his replies above, instead they were full of real meaty information. I am afraid it is you who are whining.

 

[Henning]

(4) When operating at flight level 290 and above in airspace designated as Reduced Vertical Separation Minimum (RVSM) airspace and—

In my mind I am still attaching this to the (b) you highlighted; am I incorrect in that? I never operate in that airspace. I've been that high once as PIC and it was a special request for a test flight and he assigned a block to FL 350 and I used 31,300 of it. Could you explain to me the airspace referenced in this quote? How can that be uncontrolled?

Thanks.

 

[Gary F]

You are trying to learn but you seem to disagree with whatever Ron writes, strange way of learning. I myself am learning a lot from Ron's answers (not only in this thread), he writes clearly, convincingly and calmly and there was absolutely nothing condescending in his replies above, instead they were full of real meaty information. I am afraid it is you who are whining.

Google it is not a useful suggestion.

Ron has a rigid, pessimistic perspective but he might be right when it comes to the FAA. In the medical profession we often have disagreements but we are expected to base our arguments on data and other objective evidence, not a "that's the way I see" or look it up yourself attitude. A lot of people ask questions in the medical forum and I try very hard to distill the answer down to an easy understandable explanation, often with links to appropriate sources.

 

[roncachamp]

In my mind I am still attaching this to the (b) you highlighted; am I incorrect in that?

You are not incorrect in that.

I never operate in that airspace. I've been that high once as PIC and it was a special request for a test flight and he assigned a block to FL 350 and I used 31,300 of it. Could you explain to me the airspace referenced in this quote? How can that be uncontrolled?

The way all uncontrolled airspace is uncontrolled, by not having been designated as controlled airspace. We tend to think of US airspace as being Class E between 14,500 MSL and FL180, Class A between FL180 and FL600, and Class E above that. That's not quite correct:

Title 14: Aeronautics and Space

PART 71—DESIGNATION OF CLASS A, B, C, D, AND E AIRSPACE AREAS; AIR TRAFFIC SERVICE ROUTES; AND REPORTING POINTS

§ 71.33 Class A airspace areas.

(a) That airspace of the United States, including that airspace overlying the waters within 12 nautical miles of the coast of the 48 contiguous States, from 18,000 feet MSL to and including FL600 excluding the states of Alaska and Hawaii, Santa Barbara Island, Farallon Island, and the airspace south of latitude 25°04'00" North.

(b) That airspace of the State of Alaska, including that airspace overlying the waters within 12 nautical miles of the coast, from 18,000 feet MSL to and including FL600 but not including the airspace less than 1,500 feet above the surface of the earth and the Alaska Peninsula west of longitude 160°00'00" West.

(c) The airspace areas listed as offshore airspace areas in subpart A of FAA Order 7400.9V (incorporated by reference, see §71.1) that are designated in international airspace within areas of domestic radio navigational signal or ATC radar coverage, and within which domestic ATC procedures are applied.

[Amdt. 71–14, 56 FR 65654, Dec. 17, 1991]


§ 71.71 Class E airspace.

Class E Airspace consists of:

(a) The airspace of the United States, including that airspace overlying the waters within 12 nautical miles of the coast of the 48 contiguous states and Alaska, extending upward from 14,500 feet MSL up to, but not including 18,000 feet MSL, and the airspace above FL600, excluding—

(1) The Alaska peninsula west of longitude 160°00'00" W.; and

(2) The airspace below 1,500 feet above the surface of the earth.

(b) The airspace areas designated for an airport in subpart E of FAA Order 7400.9V (incorporated by reference, see §71.1) within which all aircraft operators are subject to the operating rules specified in part 91 of this chapter.

(c) The airspace areas listed as domestic airspace areas in subpart E of FAA Order 7400.9V (incorporated by reference, see §71.1) which extend upward from 700 feet or more above the surface of the earth when designated in conjunction with an airport for which an approved instrument approach procedure has been prescribed, or from 1,200 feet or more above the surface of the earth for the purpose of transitioning to or from the terminal or en route environment. When such areas are designated in conjunction with airways or routes, the extent of such designation has the lateral extent identical to that of a Federal airway and extends upward from 1,200 feet or higher. Unless otherwise specified, the airspace areas in the paragraph extend upward from 1,200 feet or higher above the surface to, but not including, 14,500 feet MSL.

(d) The Federal airways described in subpart E of FAA Order 7400.9V (incorporated by reference, see §71.1).

(e) The airspace areas listed as en route domestic airspace areas in subpart E of FAA Order 7400.9U (incorporated by reference, see §71.1). Unless otherwise specified, each airspace area has a lateral extent identical to that of a Federal airway and extends upward from 1,200 feet above the surface of the earth to the overlying or adjacent controlled airspace.

(f) The airspace areas listed as offshore airspace areas in subpart E of FAA Order 7400.9V (incorporated by reference, see §71.1) that are designated in international airspace within areas of domestic radio navigational signal or ATC radar coverage, and within which domestic ATC procedures are applied. Unless otherwise specified, each airspace area extends upward from a specified altitude up to, but not including, 18,000 feet MSL.

[Doc. No. 29334, 73 FR 54495, Sept. 22, 2008, as amended by Amdt. 71–40, 73 FR 60940, Oct. 15, 2008; Amdt. 71–41, 74 FR 46490, Sept. 10, 2009; Amdt. 71–42, 75 FR 55269, Sept. 10, 2010; Amdt. 71–43, 76 FR 53329, Aug. 26, 2011]

Order JO 7400.9V Airspace Designations and Reporting Points has some additional controlled airspace areas in the areas otherwise excluded above, so without more effort than I care to expend I cannot point to any specific airspace and say it's uncontrolled at or above FL 290.

 

[Henning]

Thank you, most excellent. Interesting the Santa Barbara Island exclusion. Lot of stuff shoots and flies through that corridor. When they had what could only have been Aurora on San Nicolaus Island it came through there. Donuts on a roper an 6 booms. Saw it pass below me on final when I was enroute Avalon to Santa Barbara, strange shape bow for heat control, interesting thinking, obviously lifting body, I was about 3k upon him so I didn't get a great view. Or is it just geographic, SB lies outside a demarcation line?

 

[olasek]

Google it is not a useful suggestion.

Because Google is not needed here, the subject matter is obvious to me without referring to any case law and Google was only mentioned here in the context of studying individual cases. I want to fly and not be an aviation lawyer and the way Ron sketched the issue is plenty enough for me with good douse of common sense, your mileage may vary.

 

[Gary F]

Because Google is not needed here, the subject matter is obvious to me without referring to any case law and Google was only mentioned here in the context of studying individual cases. I want to fly and not be an aviation lawyer and the way Ron sketched the issue is plenty enough for me with good douse of common sense, your mileage may vary.

The purpose of a forum is to allow members to ask questions. We all realize that the information provided is a combination of fact, opinion, speculation, and reports of individual experiences. Not everything posted is necessarily accurate. Other posters should be free to disagree with posts and state their reasons. I do not believe that it is appropriate to belittle another member for disagreeing or by referring them as being lazy because they seek information here as opposed to "Googling" it. The fact we have some disagreement here implies that the subject is not so straightforward to be answered with a simple web search.

 

[aterpster]

I think that's reasonably accurate.

If that's done in one of those big brown areas, I agree.

Doesn't even have to be a big brown area.

 

[midlifeflyer]

Doesn't even have to be a big brown area.

I'm sure a lowlander like Ron would consider that a "big brown area."

 

[aterpster]

I'm sure a lowlander like Ron would consider that a "big brown area."

By "big brown areas" I take him to mean those brown areas on the IFR en route low altitude charts. Those areas with floors less than 14,500 but more than 1,200 agl show up only on sectional charts.

 

[Henning]

By "big brown areas" I take him to mean those brown areas on the IFR en route low altitude charts. Those areas with floors less than 14,500 but more than 1,200 agl show up only on sectional charts.

That's the problem with colloquialisms, they can typically be misinterpreted.

 

[aterpster]

That's the problem with colloquialisms, they can typically be misinterpreted.

There's no mistaking those brown areas on the IFR en route charts.

 

[Henning]

There's no mistaking those brown areas on the IFR en route charts.

LOL nope, not unless you're looking at the wrong chart. Since 'big brown areas' can refer to to either chart and is not an officially or commonly referenced term, the chances of misinterpretation are 50/50 varied by the target audience of pilots who primarily fly VFR or IFR and the charts they look at.

 

[alaskaflyer]

Given the small amount of area where this is possible outside the Rocky Mountain regions (where very few folks want to operate IFR in the big brown areas on the L-charts anyway), this is more an academic discussion than one of practical value.

Gee and here I thought Alaska attained statehood over fifty years ago.

 

[aterpster]

LOL nope, not unless you're looking at the wrong chart. Since 'big brown areas' can refer to to either chart and is not an officially or commonly referenced term, the chances of misinterpretation are 50/50 varied by the target audience of pilots who primarily fly VFR or IFR and the charts they look at.

What Ron said:

"...where very few folks want to operate IFR in the big brown areas on the L-charts anyway..."

That's quite clear to me. Also, anyone who plans to fly Class G IFR had better use a sectional.

 

[aterpster]

Gee and here I thought Alaska attained statehood over fifty years ago.

But, it's different up your way.

You even get Class E floors of 1,500 instead of 1,200.

 

[milkman dan]

IFR flight requires an ATC clearance. ATC will never give an IFR clearance into G airspace except an approach or departure clearance. On approach you are required to fly the approach cleared by and on departure you are required to remain clear of obstacles ("Verify this clearance will comply with local traffic pattern and terrain or obstruction aviodance") while entering class E or above.
You cannot legally cruise in class G in IMC

 

[roncachamp]

IFR flight requires an ATC clearance. ATC will never give an IFR clearance into G airspace except an approach or departure clearance. On approach you are required to fly the approach cleared by and on departure you are required to remain clear of obstacles ("Verify this clearance will comply with local traffic pattern and terrain or obstruction aviodance") while entering class E or above.
You cannot legally cruise in class G in IMC

Perhaps if you read the thread you'll change your mind.

 

[Gary F]

IFR flight requires an ATC clearance. ATC will never give an IFR clearance into G airspace except an approach or departure clearance. On approach you are required to fly the approach cleared by and on departure you are required to remain clear of obstacles ("Verify this clearance will comply with local traffic pattern and terrain or obstruction aviodance") while entering class E or above.
You cannot legally cruise in class G in IMC

Since you came in late, read this and tell me what you think it means.

http://www.faa.gov/air_traffic/publications/atpubs/aim/aim0303.html

 

[milkman dan]

Yeah and you confused me. Are you referring to OTP or flying on instruments through IMC class G? The only reason I can think of that the airspace would be G instead of E is lack of radar coverage. The airways are E regardless of radar coverage and I wasnt aware that people actually gave directs in nonradar service areas.

Im not trying to be obtuse, I'm really interested in finding out. I know whats in the books and what happens in real life are different and I wasnt aware that there were any parts of the US that IFR clearances were given through G(not on an airway)

 

[Gary F]

Yeah and you confused me. Are you referring to OTP or flying on instruments through IMC class G? The only reason I can think of that the airspace would be G instead of E is lack of radar coverage. The airways are E regardless of radar coverage and I wasnt aware that people actually gave directs in nonradar service areas.

Im not trying to be obtuse, I'm really interested in finding out. I know whats in the books and what happens in real life are different and I wasnt aware that there were any parts of the US that IFR clearances were given through G(not on an airway)

It is IFR on your own including aircraft separation which I admit is a bit problematic.

 

[milkman dan]

Interesting. I wasnt aware people actually did that.

 

[Henning]

What Ron said:

"...where very few folks want to operate IFR in the big brown areas on the L-charts anyway..."

That's quite clear to me. Also, anyone who plans to fly Class G IFR had better use a sectional.

Ahh, sorry, missed that post.

 

[John Collins]

IFR flight requires an ATC clearance. ATC will never give an IFR clearance into G airspace except an approach or departure clearance. On approach you are required to fly the approach cleared by and on departure you are required to remain clear of obstacles ("Verify this clearance will comply with local traffic pattern and terrain or obstruction aviodance") while entering class E or above.
You cannot legally cruise in class G in IMC

In 7110.65U, section 4 deals with route assignment.

4−4−5. CLASS G AIRSPACE
Include routes through Class G airspace only when requested by the pilot.
NOTE−
1. Flight plans filed for random RNAV routes through Class G airspace are considered a request by the pilot.
2. Flight plans containing MTR segments in/through Class G airspace are considered a request by the pilot.

 

[Henning]

Interesting. I wasnt aware people actually did that.

I had an approach I wrote into my ranch strip in TX. My runway was easy to find on a 2 VOR/DME fix flown from a fix on an airway on an "unpublished NDB" (private AM station) bearing that got me within a mile with easy to follow highway approach lights. I had a wide open flood plain as my approach with a 1200' minimum on a 800' antenna until I confirm passage on station as well as needle fix alignment and I was good to descend to 1150' on a 180 using the altimeter setting my wife gave me on the phone. Without that I'd have to use Sheppard altimeter and minimums went up to 1300'. All legal self directed IFR, and as far as IFR goes, it is in the rules so I call it IFR; I'm just not in the system.

BTW, for the curious, I'd maintain the squawk I departed Controlled Airspace with.

 

[Palmpilot]

I know whats in the books and what happens in real life are different and I wasnt aware that there were any parts of the US that IFR clearances were given through G(not on an airway)

As long as you comply with instrument flight rules, you can fly in IMC in class G without a clearance. The proof is that there's a regulation that requires a clearance to fly IFR in controlled airspace, but there is no regulation that requires a clearance to fly IFR in uncontrolled airspace.

 

[Gary F]

Yeah and you confused me. Are you referring to OTP or flying on instruments through IMC class G? The only reason I can think of that the airspace would be G instead of E is lack of radar coverage. The airways are E regardless of radar coverage and I wasnt aware that people actually gave directs in nonradar service areas.

Im not trying to be obtuse, I'm really interested in finding out. I know whats in the books and what happens in real life are different and I wasnt aware that there were any parts of the US that IFR clearances were given through G(not on an airway)

Check out the areas of Class G in Upper Michigan on the Green Bay sectional chart. I believe that these areas (for the most part) have radar coverage. Perhaps Steven will comment.

 

[aterpster]

I had an approach I wrote into my ranch strip in TX. My runway was easy to find on a 2 VOR/DME fix flown from a fix on an airway on an "unpublished NDB" (private AM station) bearing that got me within a mile with easy to follow highway approach lights. I had a wide open flood plain as my approach with a 1200' minimum on a 800' antenna until I confirm passage on station as well as needle fix alignment and I was good to descend to 1150' on a 180 using the altimeter setting my wife gave me on the phone. Without that I'd have to use Sheppard altimeter and minimums went up to 1300'. All legal self directed IFR, and as far as IFR goes, it is in the rules so I call it IFR; I'm just not in the system.

BTW, for the curious, I'd maintain the squawk I departed Controlled Airspace with.

Not legal. You cannot roll your own instrument approach under any circumstances without violating 91.175 and Part 97.

In Class G you can depart on a roll your own departure, climb to a legal IFR altitude and from that point on you must remain at or above the minimum legal IFR altitude at all times until (if) you become VFR or obtain an IFR clearance from ATC to enter controlled airspace.

 

[aterpster]

Yeah and you confused me. Are you referring to OTP or flying on instruments through IMC class G? The only reason I can think of that the airspace would be G instead of E is lack of radar coverage. The airways are E regardless of radar coverage and I wasnt aware that people actually gave directs in nonradar service areas.

Im not trying to be obtuse, I'm really interested in finding out. I know whats in the books and what happens in real life are different and I wasnt aware that there were any parts of the US that IFR clearances were given through G(not on an airway)

Only on pilot request and presumably transiting a Class G area out of controlled airspace and subsequently back into controlled airspace. But, if the entire operation would remain in Class G ATC doesn't even want to hear from the pilot.

 

[Captain]

Not legal. You cannot roll your own instrument approach under any circumstances without violating 91.175 and Part 97.

In Class G you can depart on a roll your own departure, climb to a legal IFR altitude and from that point on you must remain at or above the minimum legal IFR altitude at all times until (if) you become VFR or obtain an IFR clearance from ATC to enter controlled airspace.

If you can fly through the layer on takeoff in class G then you can descend through the layer to land in class G. The point being that uncontrolled airspace is just that. The only requirement to fly in the clouds in class G is 'equipped and rated'. If those two don't apply to you then the VFR cloud clearances apply.

 

[poadeleted20]

I had an approach I wrote into my ranch strip in TX. My runway was easy to find on a 2 VOR/DME fix flown from a fix on an airway on an "unpublished NDB" (private AM station) bearing that got me within a mile with easy to follow highway approach lights. I had a wide open flood plain as my approach with a 1200' minimum on a 800' antenna until I confirm passage on station as well as needle fix alignment and I was good to descend to 1150' on a 180 using the altimeter setting my wife gave me on the phone. Without that I'd have to use Sheppard altimeter and minimums went up to 1300'. All legal self directed IFR, and as far as IFR goes, it is in the rules so I call it IFR; I'm just not in the system.

No, not legal. 91.175(a) does not make any exceptions for instrument letdowns in Class G airspace.

(a) Instrument approaches to civil airports. Unless otherwise authorized by the FAA, when it is necessary to use an instrument approach to a civil airport, each person operating an aircraft must use a standard instrument approach procedure prescribed in part 97 of this chapter for that airport. This paragraph does not apply to United States military aircraft.

In order to arrive IFR at an airport without an instrument approach, whether in controlled airspace or not, you must be able to descend visually from the minimum IFR altitude per 91.177, and that 800 foot antenna would drive the MIA up to at least 1800.,

There is a process for getting a "private" instrument approach designed, checked, and approved, but it's not cheap. Without that, you are not allowed to "roll your own" instrument approaches.

 

[poadeleted20]

If you can fly through the layer on takeoff in class G then you can descend through the layer to land in class G.

Not so. Read 91.175(a) again. And flying through a layer on takeoff in Class G is also illegal unless either it's Class G all the way up, or you have a clearance to enter the overlying controlled airspace. Read Administrator v. Murphy on that one.

The point being that uncontrolled airspace is just that. The only requirement to fly in the clouds in class G is 'equipped and rated'.

There are a lot of other rules which apply to IFR operations, and most of them don't have exceptions for uncontrolled (Class G) airspace.

 

[Gary F]

There are a lot of other rules which apply to IFR operations, and most of them don't have exceptions for uncontrolled (Class G) airspace.

I suspect that most of those rules are related to ATC and may not apply in Class G where controllers do not venture.

 

[Palmpilot]

If you can fly through the layer on takeoff in class G then you can descend through the layer to land in class G. The point being that uncontrolled airspace is just that. The only requirement to fly in the clouds in class G is 'equipped and rated'. If those two don't apply to you then the VFR cloud clearances apply.

Where do you see a class G exception to this:

§ 91.175 Takeoff and landing under IFR.

(a) Instrument approaches to civil airports. Unless otherwise authorized by the FAA, when it is necessary to use an instrument approach to a civil airport, each person operating an aircraft must use a standard instrument approach procedure prescribed in part 97 of this chapter for that airport. This paragraph does not apply to United States military aircraft.
​

 

[Captain]

Not so. Read 91.175(a) again. And flying through a layer on takeoff in Class G is also illegal unless either it's Class G all the way up, or you have a clearance to enter the overlying controlled airspace. Read Administrator v. Murphy on that one.

There are a lot of other rules which apply to IFR operations, and most of them don't have exceptions for uncontrolled (Class G) airspace.

I assume class G at all times. If class E (or D, or C, or B ) ever comes into play then what I said doesn't apply. If I mis-understood the situation described I apologize.

 

[poadeleted20]

I suspect that most of those rules are related to ATC and may not apply in Class G where controllers do not venture.

Neither 91.175 nor 91.177, which are the two most directly applicable to the issue of IFR approaches and departures, are "related to ATC" nor not applicable in Class G. I'd suggest giving a full and careful read through all the IFR flight rules (91.167, et seq) on that matter. When you're done, you'll see that they pretty much all apply for uncontrolled as well as controlled airspace other than filing an IFR flight plan and obtaining an ATC clearance (91.173).