IFR XC of shooting 3 different kinds of approaches with NA

[astarvingpilot]

So, I was doing instrument xc for those 3 different kinds of approaches in three different airports.
I have 2 questions about this topic.

1. If I've already shot the ILS into a full stop, could I shoot another ILS approach at another airport with circling to landing and still count it as a different kind?

2. If I shoot the approach during the night that said NA at night, could this approach still count towards the log book to make this flight qualified?

 

[ja_user]

1. Why wouldn’t you just do the Localizer circle to runway X and not have to deal with explaining why you did two ILS approaches?

2. If the approach is NA at night, I wouldn’t use it at night on an ifr flight plan. Not saying atc wouldn’t clear you for it….

 

[midlifeflyer]

Aren't you planning this dual cross country with your instructor?

My article in IFR Magazine, "These Three Approaches" might help. The title is because it's a follow up to my earlier, "Which Three Approaches?"

On question #2, this flight is a flight under Instrument Flight Rules. These are not practice approaches where you can just make things up.

 

[Original post]

1. Why wouldn’t you just do the Localizer circle to runway X and not have to deal with explaining why you did two ILS approaches?

2. If the approach is NA at night, I wouldn’t use it at night on an ifr flight plan. Not saying atc wouldn’t clear you for it….

That’s right, and this thought I only figured out after the flight of doing LOC circle.
2, ATC did cleared us to shoot that approach which was NA night. So I’m not sure if this approach could be legally logged in the logbook

 

[Original post]

Aren't you planning this dual cross country with your instructor?

My article in IFR Magazine, "These Three Approaches" might help. The title is because it's a follow up to my earlier, "Which Three Approaches?"

On question #2, this flight is a flight under Instrument Flight Rules. These are not practice approaches where you can just make things up.

Yes, and for question number 2.
I wanna make sure even ATC did clear us for the approach but it is said procedure NA night under IFR flight plan with VFR condition.
However, this is IFR XC, if the approach can not legally log it. I would say this XC I have to redo

 

[John Collins]

Flying an "ILS or LOC" approach procedure to circle to land is a Localizer procedure to an MDA and would count as a different kind of approach. An ILS is a precision approach to a DA and a LOC approach is a non precision procedure to an MDA. The second question makes no sense, NA means "Not Authorized" and if you were to fly the procedure at night, you would be in violation of the regulations.

 

[RussR]

2, ATC did cleared us to shoot that approach which was NA night. So I’m not sure if this approach could be legally logged in the logbook

Well yes, it's completely legal to LOG it, since you flew it. However, flying it was a violation of Part 97, so by putting it in your logbook you are putting in writing an admission of the violation. Basically, it's legal to log it, but not legal that you did it.

If I was a DPE and caught that, I would certainly not allow the XC to count, and when we finally did get to the checkride you can bet I'd be spending a lot of time on chart reading for understanding of applicable notes. ATC should not have cleared you for it, but they aren't the airspace police either.

 

[midlifeflyer]

ATC should not have cleared you for it, but they aren't the airspace police either.

The ATC thing is interesting. The Point 65 specifically says it's not ATC's responsibility to make pilots comply with the rules and chart notes (my emphasis):

Approach clearances are issued based on known traffic. The receipt of an approach clearance does not relieve the pilot of his/her responsibility to comply with applicable Parts of Title 14 of the Code of Federal Regulations and the notations on instrument approach charts which levy on the pilot the responsibility to comply with or act on an instruction; for example, “Straight-in minima not authorized at night,” “Procedure not authorized when glideslope/glidepath not used,” “Use of procedure limited to aircraft authorized to use airport,” or “Procedure not authorized at night” or Snowflake icon with associated temperature.​

OTOH, I know that there is variation among controllers. Some will deny the approach clearance; others will not. When I wrote my article on "NA at Night" I ran the question by the controllers in two Facebook controller groups and got both answers from controllers. My WAG is that, on the dual IFR cross country, if it's VFR conditions and the CFI explains it's "only" a training flight, most will ultimately say OK. That, of course begs the question of the instructional value of breaking the rules on the one and only required IFR cross country training flight instead of choosing better.

 

[John Collins]

There was an incident many years ago where a controller refused to clear an aircraft for an approach because of the NA at night, but it was because it was at sunset. So in that instance, night was probably 25 minutes in the future. The pilot had to land at another airport and get ground transportation to get back to his car. He also needed to pickup the airplane the next day and fly it to his home base. All in all it was a major inconvenience and significant expense because the controller did not follow guidance. The definition of night is intentional. According to FAR 1.1, "Night means the time between the end of evening civil twilight and the beginning of morning civil twilight, as published in the Air Almanac, converted to local time". The reason for NA at night is because one needs to be able to see obstacles that are not lit so they can be avoided visually by the pilot, there is sufficient light to accomplish this up to the end of civil twilight time.