missed approach without holding pattern?

[wabower]

That's exactly what DFW Center said when I landed in Tulsa after a total elec failure. Riverside tower was equally happy that I was on the ground, even though I wasn't cleared to land.

If you're flying solo and have lost comm, how and to whom do you declare an emergency? Are you required to say it out loud in order for it to count?

Of course, the folks in ATC will no doubt be thrilled, and from what I know, they will be clearing the airspace below you just in case you do decide to make that deviation, but if something goes wrong, you may face an investigation for your violation of 91.185(c), and for what it's worth, Flight Standards' written position on this is that lost comm is not by itself an emergency.

That said, I'm pretty sure I can make a good case for saying that loss of all radio communications capability is sufficient grounds for me to argue that there may be something seriously wrong with my plane's electrical system, and 91.7(b) says that if an unairworthy electrical condition develops in flight, I am required to discontinute the flight. Put that together with 91.3(b), and I think I can successfully beat a 91.185(c) charge.

So, if you put it all together, landing short of your destination in a lost comm situation is a violation of 91.185(c), but one which ATC won't mind and from which you should be able to successfully defend yourself.

 

[roncachamp]

Perhaps not, but if you are not in and do not encounter VMC, going all the way to your destination is what 91.185(c) requires. If you choose to land somewhere short of your destination other than visually as required by 91.185(b) if you do enter VMC, you are exercising your emergency authority per 91.3(b) to deviate from the requirements of 91.185(c).

Of course, the folks in ATC will no doubt be thrilled, and from what I know, they will be clearing the airspace below you just in case you do decide to make that deviation, but if something goes wrong, you may face an investigation for your violation of 91.185(c), and for what it's worth, Flight Standards' written position on this is that lost comm is not by itself an emergency.

That said, I'm pretty sure I can make a good case for saying that loss of all radio communications capability is sufficient grounds for me to argue that there may be something seriously wrong with my plane's electrical system, and 91.7(b) says that if an unairworthy electrical condition develops in flight, I am required to discontinute the flight. Put that together with 91.3(b), and I think I can successfully beat a 91.185(c) charge.

So, if you put it all together, landing short of your destination in a lost comm situation is a violation of 91.185(c), but one which ATC won't mind and from which you should be able to successfully defend yourself.

IIRC the situation under discussion is a loss of all communications on the missed approach at the destination. That isn't covered in FAR 91.185 at all.

 

[poadeleted20]

Geez Ron, I've been trying to make that point all along. My 'dripping sarcasm' needs work

I suppose it does. I guess you were being sarcastic about putting false entries in your logbook, too?

 

[poadeleted20]

If you're flying solo and have lost comm, how and to whom do you declare an emergency? Are you required to say it out loud in order for it to count?

No. What counts is the situation. See the definitions of Emergency, Distress, and Urgency in the Pilot/Controller Glossary -- it's all about the situation, not the words you say.

 

[roncachamp]

If you're flying solo and have lost comm, how and to whom do you declare an emergency? Are you required to say it out loud in order for it to count?

You don't have to declare it, you don't have to say it out loud, you don't even have to whisper it, you simply have to have it.


§ 91.3 Responsibility and authority of the pilot in command.

(a) The pilot in command of an aircraft is directly responsible for, and is the final authority as to, the operation of that aircraft.

(b) In an in-flight emergency requiring immediate action, the pilot in command may deviate from any rule of this part to the extent required to meet that emergency.

(c) Each pilot in command who deviates from a rule under paragraph (b) of this section shall, upon the request of the Administrator, send a written report of that deviation to the Administrator.

 

[poadeleted20]

IIRC the situation under discussion is a loss of all communications on the missed approach at the destination. That isn't covered in FAR 91.185 at all.

Agreed. I thought someone was talking about the requirements for lost comm vis a vis VMC/IMC while en route to the destination, which say if you can land visually you do so as soon as practical, but if not you continue to your destination (unless you break out visually before there). In a missed approach situation, there is no regulatory or advisory guidance whatsoever, so it's entirely up to the PIC to choose the course of action which best assures a safe conclusion without any restrictions, suggestions, or guidance in any regulation, AIM, AC, or other FAA document. There are any number of options for the pilot in that situation, and nothing from the FAA saying any one of them might be mandated, preferred, or discouraged.

 

[wabower]

So you thought that was a serious question too?

You don't have to declare it, you don't have to say it out loud, you don't even have to whisper it, you simply have to have it.


§ 91.3 Responsibility and authority of the pilot in command.

(a) The pilot in command of an aircraft is directly responsible for, and is the final authority as to, the operation of that aircraft.

(b) In an in-flight emergency requiring immediate action, the pilot in command may deviate from any rule of this part to the extent required to meet that emergency.

(c) Each pilot in command who deviates from a rule under paragraph (b) of this section shall, upon the request of the Administrator, send a written report of that deviation to the Administrator.

 

[roncachamp]

So you thought that was a serious question too?

Absolutely.

 

[Captain]

I suppose it does. I guess you were being sarcastic about putting false entries in your logbook, too?

lol, no. I stand behind that one. You were, however, spot on with why an alternate is required and it's nothing to do with lost comms.

I'm off to log made up dual received now...

 

[azure]

Geez Ron, I've been trying to make that point all along. My 'dripping sarcasm' needs work if only 1 guy (steve) on the forum gets it.

I have to admit that I had my doubts after #154, but you put them to rest with #156. But no, Steve wasn't alone, far from it I'm sure.

 

[Everskyward]

I have to admit that I had my doubts after #154, but you put them to rest with #156. But no, Steve wasn't alone, far from it I'm sure.

I'll admit I had the alternate suspicion. It crossed my mind that they were the same person.

Well, they did show up about the same time.

 

[gismo]

Can't believe I missed out on this whole thread. The title didn't seem that interesting to me for some reason. Goes to show you can't judge a book by it's cover.

KAPilot is absolutely right. Lost comms are all about expectations. If I'm on an IFR flight plan and let down on a VFR day and go around due to a moose on the runway, and on that go around I lose comms I must go to my filed alternate.

Now, if that filed alternate is bogged down with horrible weather that makes no difference, expectations are expectations.

Also, as I depart my VFR field NORDO and punch into the soup it would be wholly irresponsible to climb above the mountains and go direct. The much better technique would be to stay on the airways at MEA and fly the valleys to my filed alternate because, again, expectations...ATC expects me to fly as low as possible in the mountains.

Now, Cap'n Ron, is way off base stating alternate requirements are for fuel. There is clearly no correlation between A.) HAVING to have a legal alternate with fuel to get there plus reserves and B.) having enough fuel.

In summary, lost comms...go to the filed alternate. No choice in the matter. Also, putting the alternate route in the remarks? Not just clever...but brilliant!! Of course, in any abnormal situation you want to eliminate as many variables as possible and forcing a particular route on yourself with expired information is just plain good airmanship.

Of course, my opinion on this subject matter little as I'm just a weekend warrior...couple IFR flights a year.

You had me going there for a minute but once I made it to "bogged down with horrible weather" I started to chuckle. Had to read your post twice to be sure it was all in jest though.