Instrument Student in IMC

[Joey1489]

I know an instrumental student that shot an approach and landed in IFR conditions at a class E airport today. I went to the reporting FAA website, I need I need to fill out my personal information, is it truly anonymous? I’m honestly concerned about repercussions with this coming back on me. I can’t prove it happened but the flight and metars definitely prove it.

 

[rk911]

 

[RussR]

Do you KNOW there was a violation? Was there a CFII on board? Was there another instrument-rated pilot on board?

Did you try asking the pilot about it?

 

[Joey1489]

Do you KNOW there was a violation? Was there a CFII on board? Was there another instrument-rated pilot on board?

Did you try asking the pilot about it?

No CFII or flight plan, he was solo

 

[PaulS]

No CFII or flight plan, he was solo

Call his cfi. We don't need jerks like this flying.

 

[FORANE]

Sounds like he passed his midterm.

 

[luvflyin]

I know an instrumental student that shot an approach and landed in IFR conditions at a class E airport today. I went to the reporting FAA website, I need I need to fill out my personal information, is it truly anonymous? I’m honestly concerned about repercussions with this coming back on me. I can’t prove it happened but the flight and metars definitely prove it.

What was the Ceiling and Visibility? Did you hear him get an Approach Clearance. Could be he got a SVFR Clearance? Do you know for sure one way or the other?

 

[Salty]

Need more information on the type of instrumental student he is. Electrical or acoustical? String, reed, brass, percussion?

 

[WannFly]

guessing OP is the pilots ex lol

 

[Deelee]

Need more information on the type of instrumental student he is

 

[texasclouds]

Welcome fellow aviation enthusiast!

 

[mandm]

Isn’t class E outside of FAA’s remit? I always get class E and G confused ha. But in the event of an emergency, he would be allowed to shoot the approach. Also, ceilings and visibility are what the pilot experience, not necessarily what the METAR’s are. METAR’s are not always 100% correct and they are typically delayed, the real world situation could have been very different. How would anyone know?

 

[MauleSkinner]

I can’t prove it happened but the flight and metars definitely prove it.

No CFII or flight plan,

You said it yourself…you can’t prove it, and there was no evidence that he was there. Why bother the FAA?

I’m honestly concerned about repercussions with this coming back on me.

What repercussions, and why are you worried about them if it’s as cut and dried as you think?

as @PaulS said…talk to his instructor. Let him sort it out.

 

[luvflyin]

Isn’t class E outside of FAA’s remit? I always get class E and G confused ha. But in the event of an emergency, he would be allowed to shoot the approach. Also, ceilings and visibility are what the pilot experience, not necessarily what the METAR’s are. METAR’s are not always 100% correct and they are typically delayed, the real world situation could have been very different. How would anyone know?

Ceilings are what is reported. Pilots can give a bases report and the Weather Observer can take that into account to report the Ceiling. There is Reported Visibility and there is Flight Visibility. Sometimes Reported Visibility rules a situation and sometimes Flight Visibility does. Depends on the situation.

 

[TommyG]

If you are gonna rat people out, you should man up and out your name to it.

 

[RyanB]

Isn’t class E outside of FAA’s remit?

Not sure what you mean by ‘remit’ but E is still controlled airspace and I’m guessing at whatever airport this occurred at, it was E to the surface, so G wouldn’t have been applicable.

 

[Clip4]

Your information will be anonymous because the FAA may contact you as part of the investigation. Your identity will not be disclosed during the investigation.

 

[Tantalum]

Seems like there are other courses of action before going straight to the top.. as others have mentioned, if you are concerned go to the CFI, or the club first

Our club has a vehicle by which people can report behaviors they feel are unsafe or are otherwise violations for the 'superiors' to handle


Also, what's your motivation? To educate/save his life, or to get him in trouble? Was the IMC malicious? Lots of missing details here, but if you're concerned I'd go to the CFI / club / school first and let that be it

 

[TCABM]

… I can’t prove it happened but the flight and metars definitely prove it.

How does a flight track and a metar prove a specific person accepted an IFR clearance they or was conducted in IMC without an IFR clearance when it was required?

 

[thito01]

The OP needs to understand that this is not the same a reporting a drunk driver going down the interstate on the wrong side.
I wonder if he really understands what is happening everyday in the skies around him.

Pilots without BFRs flying.
Pilots without medicals flying.
Pilots who lied on their medicals.
IR pilots flying on IFR flight-plans who should have had an IPC 10 years ago.
Non-IR pilots flying in IMC.
Airplanes out of annual flying.
Student pilots that own their own plane and fly all the time and who have not talked to a CFI in years.
Airplanes that are going to fall out of the sky (not really) because the cigarette lighter was not working and was not placarded N/O.
Airplanes where the owner made some un-supervised repair.

I am not justifying these actions, but they are happening all the time.

The OP sounds like a little brother that just wants to get is big brother in trouble.

And, there are ways the pilot's actions were actually legal.

 

[MauleSkinner]

And, there are ways the pilot's actions were actually legal

Assuming the pilot’s actions resembled the OP’s description, what are some of those ways? (I can only come up with the one previously mentioned.)

 

[midlifeflyer]

Isn’t class E outside of FAA’s remit?

Assuming that's a real question, Class E is "controlled airspace." ATC's authority to control operations is what the "controlled" in "controlled airspace" means,

 

[thito01]

Assuming the pilot’s actions resembled the OP’s description, what are some of those ways? (I can only come up with the one previously mentioned.)

I mentioned this because we don't have a lot of facts on the table. But, just off the top of my head:
1) He got stuck on top and declared an emergency.
2) The pilot has passed his IR check ride and the OP just does not know that it has happened.
3) The pilot was actually under special-VFR approval. (Do we know if there is an open tower, closed tower, no tower?)
4) The OP has never given us the METAR data.
5) The OP claims that the pilot 'shot an approach and landed in IFR conditions'. How does he know that the pilot 'shot an approach'? There may have been a hole the OP did not see.
6) Is this 'Class-E to the surface', or 'Class-E to 700 feet'?

There are way more questions, than facts, in this thread.

 

[thito01]

To the OP.
Please post the airport, tail number, date & time. I don't care about the pilots name. I want to see the track and compare it to the approach plate. And I want to get the METAR.

 

[zx12 rfl@outlook.com]

I’m pretty sure we will never her from the OP again.

 

[flyingpreacher]

Even with all that "proof" of the metars and flight track, you can't prove that the pilot in question was in fact flying.

 

[thito01]

I am thinking that this is a troll. Or, a very immature person.

 

[CT583]

This sounds like a NextDoor dog poop post.

While what the pilot did may be in question, was he confronted at the ramp?
If I saw some freshly minted PPL blatantly bust through minimums, I’d probably be there as the prop stopped turning. Letting someone know they ....ed up in person is typically a bigger deterrent for future activities. They will never know who’s watching them.
Plus, you have a chance to see in person if their actions were with intent or simply got caught in IMC and turned around to the airport.

I’m an instrument student now, but if I got caught in IMC, you can bet I’m finding the closest airport with a procedure, letting ATC know my situation, then flying it if approved. Unless you just happened to be casually listening to Approach frequency and didn’t hear any transmissions, then there are too many unknown variables.

 

[Hengelo]

OP to answer your first question, there are three levels of anonymity on the FAA reporting site:

1) totally anonymous
2) your name not attached to the report but they may contact you for further details
3) your name associated with the report

That written, I suggest you take a minute to review what's written above; jokes aside most of it is fair. Your post doesn't cover a lot of plausible scenarios and your eagerness to report someone doesn't jive with the scenario you describe.

 

[MauleSkinner]

I mentioned this because we don't have a lot of facts on the table. But, just off the top of my head:
1) He got stuck on top and declared an emergency.
2) The pilot has passed his IR check ride and the OP just does not know that it has happened.
3) The pilot was actually under special-VFR approval. (Do we know if there is an open tower, closed tower, no tower?)
4) The OP has never given us the METAR data.
5) The OP claims that the pilot 'shot an approach and landed in IFR conditions'. How does he know that the pilot 'shot an approach'? There may have been a hole the OP did not see.
6) Is this 'Class-E to the surface', or 'Class-E to 700 feet'?

There are way more questions, than facts, in this thread.

True, there are way more questions than facts, which is why my question assumed the pilots actions matched what the OP said, in which case only #3 and maybe #1 apply.

 

[WDD]

You should address this with the pilot first in private. Uncomfortable? Sure. Repercussions? Like what? He/She won't like you any more?

If it was a matter that he/she didn't use the appropriate phrasing when working the radio, then I'd say "Not your business - leave it alone Karen".

But flying IMC when you aren't fully trained is worthy of a chat.

 

[MauleSkinner]

You should address this with the pilot first in private. Uncomfortable? Sure. Repercussions? Like what? He/She won't like you any more?

Maybe it’s a spouse.

 

[Jim Kickland]

Dont be a jerk. Man up and talk to him directly if you feel the need.

 

[brcase]

Assuming the pilot’s actions resembled the OP’s description, what are some of those ways? (I can only come up with the one previously mentioned.)

I think the only thing anyone might be able prove happened is he accepted an IFR Clearance when Not instrument rated.
Metar data might suggest it was IMC but doesn't mean it was for the pilot. I have landed in sunshine and clear while the Metar is (accurately I might add) saying it is 1/4FG SN 0100OVC.
Anyone that has flown in those kind of conditions much knows that what the pilot sees and what someone sees on the ground are often two very different things.

Brian

 

[MauleSkinner]

I think the only thing anyone might be able prove happened is he accepted an IFR Clearance when Not instrument rated.
Metar data might suggest it was IMC but doesn't mean it was for the pilot. I have landed in sunshine and clear while the Metar is (accurately I might add) saying it is 1/4FG SN 0100OVC.
Anyone that has flown in those kind of conditions much knows that what the pilot sees and what someone sees on the ground are often two very different things.

Brian

The way I read 91.155, reported weather is controlling when operating at an airport in controlled airspace.

(c) Except as provided in § 91.157, no person may operate an aircraft beneath the ceiling under VFR within the lateral boundaries of controlled airspace designated to the surface for an airport when the ceiling is less than 1,000 feet.

(d) Except as provided in § 91.157 of this part, no person may take off or land an aircraft, or enter the traffic pattern of an airport, under VFR, within the lateral boundaries of the surface areas of Class B, Class C, Class D, or Class E airspace designated for an airport -

(1) Unless ground visibility at that airport is at least 3 statute miles; or

(2) If ground visibility is not reported at that airport, unless flight visibility during landing or takeoff, or while operating in the traffic pattern is at least 3 statute miles.

 

[KeepWatch]

I'm not a longtime POA member, but I am on other forums. And there's always this guy who likes to stir $#(% up. Whoever that guy is on POA probably created this guest username Joey because he got bored.

 

[brcase]

The way I read 91.155, reported weather is controlling when operating at an airport in controlled airspace.

I don’t actually see anything there that requires the “reported visibility” to be 3 miles. (d)2 maybe infers that (d)1 is intended to be reported visibility, and it obviously is up to the tower at B,C,D airspace to make the determination of what the visibility is.

One of the questions we probably don’t want to ask the FAA, what does 3 miles visibility really mean. Does it mean if there is a fog bank 2.5 miles to the side of the runway, that it is not legal to land?

What happens when the ASOS is saying 1/4mile and OVC at 200 feet, when it is obviously clear and greater than 10 miles.I have seen exactly that happen before, and more than once.

Brian

 

[luvflyin]

The way I read 91.155, reported weather is controlling when operating at an airport in controlled airspace.

Not always if it is a Satellite airport in a Surface Area. Now if the Ceiling at the Primary airport is less than 1000 there are some rules about that in 91.157, which 155 points you to. Here’s a Surface Area that can help illustrate what some the mumbo jumbo in 157 is getting at. KCLM. Now play around with different combinations of the reported weather at KCLM and KNOW.

 

[luvflyin]

I don’t actually see anything there that requires the “reported visibility” to be 3 miles. (d)2 maybe infers that (d)1 is intended to be reported visibility, and it obviously is up to the tower at B,C,D airspace to make the determination of what the visibility is.

One of the questions we probably don’t want to ask the FAA, what does 3 miles visibility really mean. Does it mean if there is a fog bank 2.5 miles to the side of the runway, that it is not legal to land?

What happens when the ASOS is saying 1/4mile and OVC at 200 feet, when it is obviously clear and greater than 10 miles.I have seen exactly that happen before, and more than once.

Brian

Reported visibility does rule in some situations. See post above.

 

[MauleSkinner]

I don’t actually see anything there that requires the “reported visibility” to be 3 miles. (d)2 maybe infers that (d)1 is intended to be reported visibility, and it obviously is up to the tower at B,C,D airspace to make the determination of what the visibility is.

One of the questions we probably don’t want to ask the FAA, what does 3 miles visibility really mean. Does it mean if there is a fog bank 2.5 miles to the side of the runway, that it is not legal to land?

What happens when the ASOS is saying 1/4mile and OVC at 200 feet, when it is obviously clear and greater than 10 miles.I have seen exactly that happen before, and more than once.

Brian

According to Part 1:

Ground visibility means prevailing horizontal visibility near the earth's surface as reported by the United States National Weather Service or an accredited observer.

Which pretty much answers the question you don’t want to ask the FAA as well.