Instrument approach without Inst Rating??

Jaybird180 said:
I thought there was some "standard" for operating certified GPS units that makes them function similarly across all brands, etc.

Practically I know that's not true, but is some of this standardized?
Click to expand...

The only "standard" is that the TSO dictates what the unit must do...how each function is accomplished is left up to the manufacturer.

Bob Gardner
 
Here is an interesting question. I'm not instrument rated. Let's say I call up Boston approach asking to do the practice ILS 14 at Nashua (OK, the GS is out of service right now due to construction, but lets assume it works :) ). Approach is aware that I am a VFR aircraft requesting practice approaches and they have given me the instruction to "maintain VFR". They then give me vectors to the final approach course.

Eventually they give me the standard "turn left heading 140, maintain 3000 'til established, cleared ILS 14 Approach" and I read it back following the procedure ATC expects.

Did I just accept an IFR clearance in violation of the FARs?

I haven't done this alone, but experienced this exact scenario with a CFI in the plane. Since the CFI was instrument rated I see no issue but what if the only pilot/both pilots are VFR only? If it matters when I've encountered this it is the same controller on initial call up so they do know we are VFR.
 
aterpster said:
Not to mention using a rental bird with a G-1000 that has had many of the user settings changed.
Click to expand...

Is there a menu item to restore all the default settings at once?
 
spinfire said:
Here is an interesting question. I'm not instrument rated. Let's say I call up Boston approach asking to do the practice ILS 14 at Nashua (OK, the GS is out of service right now due to construction, but lets assume it works :) ). Approach is aware that I am a VFR aircraft requesting practice approaches and they have given me the instruction to "maintain VFR". They then give me vectors to the final approach course.

Eventually they give me the standard "turn left heading 140, maintain 3000 'til established, cleared ILS 14 Approach" and I read it back following the procedure ATC expects.

Did I just accept an IFR clearance in violation of the FARs?
Click to expand...
...or did the controller just use the wrong words? Yeah, that's a bit of a conundrum, but easily solved by replying "Left 140, maintaining VFR at 3000, cleared ILS 14" -- and then not flying into any clouds. Regardless of what the controller did, you're covered on tape.
 
Ron Levy said:
...or did the controller just use the wrong words? Yeah, that's a bit of a conundrum, but easily solved by replying "Left 140, maintaining VFR at 3000, cleared ILS 14" -- and then not flying into any clouds. Regardless of what the controller did, you're covered on tape.
Click to expand...
Yeah, maybe they're technically the wrong words, but nearly all of them (around here) use those same words. As part of instrument training we have to learn the semantics of all the standard instructions, so what better way than in actual practice? E.g. when are you authorized to descend from the last assigned altitude to the published altitude for that segment? The "maintain VFR" (on their part) makes it clear that you're still VFR and everyone is on the same page. My CFII recommended NOT reading that part back as it's just extra words, and as long as everyone is clear that it's a practice VFR approach, no harm no foul.

A few (especially at Selfridge Approach) use some variation like "no separation services provided, practice approach approved". But most of them use standard IFR phraseology with "maintain VFR" thrown in for clarity.
 
spinfire said:
Here is an interesting question. I'm not instrument rated. Let's say I call up Boston approach asking to do the practice ILS 14 at Nashua (OK, the GS is out of service right now due to construction, but lets assume it works :) ). Approach is aware that I am a VFR aircraft requesting practice approaches and they have given me the instruction to "maintain VFR". They then give me vectors to the final approach course.

Eventually they give me the standard "turn left heading 140, maintain 3000 'til established, cleared ILS 14 Approach" and I read it back following the procedure ATC expects.

Did I just accept an IFR clearance in violation of the FARs?

I haven't done this alone, but experienced this exact scenario with a CFI in the plane. Since the CFI was instrument rated I see no issue but what if the only pilot/both pilots are VFR only? If it matters when I've encountered this it is the same controller on initial call up so they do know we are VFR.
Click to expand...

My understanding is that if you haven't been given a clearance limit, in the form of "Cleared to [destination]" (together with an altitude assignment and a route to fly), then you haven't received an IFR clearance.
 
spinfire said:
Here is an interesting question. I'm not instrument rated. Let's say I call up Boston approach asking to do the practice ILS 14 at Nashua (OK, the GS is out of service right now due to construction, but lets assume it works :) ). Approach is aware that I am a VFR aircraft requesting practice approaches and they have given me the instruction to "maintain VFR". They then give me vectors to the final approach course.

Eventually they give me the standard "turn left heading 140, maintain 3000 'til established, cleared ILS 14 Approach" and I read it back following the procedure ATC expects.

Did I just accept an IFR clearance in violation of the FARs?

I haven't done this alone, but experienced this exact scenario with a CFI in the plane. Since the CFI was instrument rated I see no issue but what if the only pilot/both pilots are VFR only? If it matters when I've encountered this it is the same controller on initial call up so they do know we are VFR.
Click to expand...

No.

At some airports ATC provides separation for VFR aircraft practicing instrument approaches. At these airports VFR aircraft are cleared for the approach with the "maintain VFR" proviso.
 
roncachamp said:
At some airports ATC provides separation for VFR aircraft practicing instrument approaches. At these airports VFR aircraft are cleared for the approach with the "maintain VFR" proviso.
Click to expand...
In principle, this makes a great deal of sense. How do you know if you're at an airport where separation services are provided?

In actuality, I have heard "cleared" used on occasion when doing practice approaches to VLL or even sometimes PHN, where I am quite sure no separation services are provided to VFR traffic. At other times, at the same airports I do not hear "cleared". The phraseology seems to depend on the controller, to some extent.
 
azure said:
In principle, this makes a great deal of sense. How do you know if you're at an airport where separation services are provided?
Click to expand...

ATC facilities must issue a letter to airmen advising users of airports where IFR separation is provided for VFR aircraft conducting practice instrument approaches. In times past these letters were sent by snail mail to FBOs and airport managers, who may have chosen to post them on a bulletin board, or just filed them. Now they are uploaded to the FAAST site for dissemination to pilots. That system seems to have a few holes in it. For example, the attached letter was uploaded last year but I never received any notice of it through my FAAST account.
 

Attachments

  • Letter to Airmen.pdf
    48.6 KB · Views: 13
Unless you're specifically interested in WINGS, the organization of that site is about as user-unfriendly as any I've seen. A search for "ATCT Letter to Airmen" brings up 527 results, and if I try to narrow it down with "Michigan" or "FNT" or "DTW", it brings up even more results. Yet it doesn't appear to be ORing the search string words because most of the results actually are letters to airmen of one kind or another, and from somewhere in the country.

In short, it doesn't seem like a very effective way of informing airmen of what services are provided. Why don't they simply put it in the A/FD or the book of approach plates? Wait, that would actually make sense...
 
Thanks for the insight Ron. I wasn't particularly concerned about this scenario since I hear Boston Approach use this phraseology all the time with VFR aircraft. I do really appreciate knowing the details behind it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top