Kritchlow
Final Approach
- Joined
- Dec 2, 2014
- Messages
- 7,884
- Display Name
Display name:
Kritchlow
That’s just not California.
"Procedure N/A at Night" - What is "night"?
- Thread starter thito01
- Start date
luvflyin
Touchdown! Greaser!
Something I’ve been wondering about. Don’t some airlines have some FAA authorized exceptions to certain FAR’s? In the company OpSpec, Ops Manual or whatever it’s called. What about this N/A at night thing? If certain requirements are met, can you do it?
John Collins
En-Route
But if you refused the clearance because you did not properly understand when night begins and chose to define it yourself incorrectly to be at sunset, then this is a training issue. You have no authority to change the regulations. If you want to CYA, advise the pilot the procedure is NA at night and clear them for the approach as requested.
My posts were not about changing the regulations or CYA. My posts were about people controlling air traffic and clearing an aircraft for a procedure that is NA at night when it is nighttime.
John Collins
En-Route
About half way between civil twilight beginning at sun down and ending about a half hour later, you can still read a newspaper without additional light. At the end of civil twilight is when you can no longer see and avoid unlit obstacles.
RussR
En-Route
I'm thinking something could be done like is done all the time with helicopters landing in weird spots - they're not cleared to land, ATC says "landing will be at your own risk". *
So something like "Maintain 3000 until XXXXX, approach will be at your own risk, report cancellation of IFR on this frequency, etc....."
I know it's not in the .65 currently, but seems like it would relieve responsibility from the controller as it does with landing clearances.
* I remember two examples of this to a paved runway from my AF career. One was at Edwards AFB and there was dense ground fog. We couldn't see the runway (although we could see the tops of some hangars). Told the airplane taxiing that "takeoff will be at your own risk". As I recall, the crew decided to turn around and go back to parking. The other was at Prince Sultan Air Base, Saudi Arabia, where the fighters were trying to recover as a dust storm was kicking up. Again, we couldn't see the runway from the tower, which at the time was a small, low one off to the side of the runway. The planes reported they could see the runway just fine. We offered them a "landing will be at your own risk", but they didn't want to accept that. Eventually the SOF or somebody like that just started telling them "yes, go ahead and land". Not like there were a whole lot of other places to go.
So something like "Maintain 3000 until XXXXX, approach will be at your own risk, report cancellation of IFR on this frequency, etc....."
I know it's not in the .65 currently, but seems like it would relieve responsibility from the controller as it does with landing clearances.
* I remember two examples of this to a paved runway from my AF career. One was at Edwards AFB and there was dense ground fog. We couldn't see the runway (although we could see the tops of some hangars). Told the airplane taxiing that "takeoff will be at your own risk". As I recall, the crew decided to turn around and go back to parking. The other was at Prince Sultan Air Base, Saudi Arabia, where the fighters were trying to recover as a dust storm was kicking up. Again, we couldn't see the runway from the tower, which at the time was a small, low one off to the side of the runway. The planes reported they could see the runway just fine. We offered them a "landing will be at your own risk", but they didn't want to accept that. Eventually the SOF or somebody like that just started telling them "yes, go ahead and land". Not like there were a whole lot of other places to go.
luvflyin
Touchdown! Greaser!
As it stands, the only 'responsibility' the controller has is to not deny the clearance for reasons other than traffic. But the 'at your risk' thing sounds like something that maybe should be considered. Give em a shout about it. You may have an expedited way in.
c. Proposed changes must be submitted electroni-
cally to 9−AJV−P−HQ−Correspondence@faa.gov.
The submission should include a description of the
recommended change, and the proposed language to
be used in the order.
luvflyin
Touchdown! Greaser!
Try AIM 5-5-4 a. 1. and 5-5-4 b. 1.
It's interesting the difference in wording. Para a1 of the AIM says "only" on known traffic. Para b1 omits that word.
Regardless, the verbiage in the 7110.65 omits "only" and is the controlling document.
Regardless, the verbiage in the 7110.65 omits "only" and is the controlling document.
luvflyin
Touchdown! Greaser!
Where did you find that?This is a good question.
There are some big TRACONS in parts of the US. Sunrise/sundown times are going to vary 3 minutes east to west across a 30 nm mode C veil and >10 minutes east to west across some TRACON radar service areas. A80 cuts across all of GA into AL. I don’t believe it is the controller’s responsibility to watch the sundown clock for each of the airports.
TRACON map of the United States. This map shows the “local” airspace surrounding airports.
Clip4
Touchdown! Greaser!
luvflyin
Touchdown! Greaser!
Thanks. I was hoping to find a newer one. I suppose I could join reddit and ask that guy where he got it.
If you work in an enroute facility the cartographer might be able to get you a current version.
luvflyin
Touchdown! Greaser!
Yeah. I'm long retired and don't have any contacts left there any more. My last source to get LOA's, SOP's and other juicy stuff went away a few years ago.
Kritchlow
Final Approach
- Joined
- Dec 2, 2014
- Messages
- 7,884
- Display Name
Display name:
Kritchlow
Yes, op specs are essentially regs issued to carriers. They must be applied for, and do provide some relief to the FAR’s. That said, I don’t specifically recall seeing one about waiving a night n/a approach.
John Collins
En-Route
As long as you are complying with the FAA definition of night, I am OK with that, but you are not responsible for the pilot's actions. It would be more appropriate in my opinion to advise the pilot the procedure is NA at night and not withhold the clearance. In some cases, only certain aspects of the procedure are NA at night and the approach may still be flown legally as long as the pilot complies with the NA restriction, an example is where a particular runway may be NA at night both for straight in and circling, but it is permitted to fly the procedure and circle to another runway.
MauleSkinner
Touchdown! Greaser!
The OpSpec solution would probably be authorizing an SA or other approach procedure rather than authorizing a published procedure outside of its certification.
thito01
Pre-takeoff checklist
It seems my experience that ATC always seems to say: "Get the weather and let us know which approach you want." This puts the decision directly with the pilot and he should know if he can fly it or not.
Now, what about "cleared for the visual" at night when all the published approaches say "N/A at night"?
Now, what about "cleared for the visual" at night when all the published approaches say "N/A at night"?
There's no requirement for an airport to even have an instrument approach in order to fly a visual approach. Visual approaches were common at my airport before it had an instrument approach.
I may not know much but how is a visual approach even an instrument approach, let alone be published where such a restriction can be stipulated? Or were you kidding?
thito01
Pre-takeoff checklist
I was trying to ask "If all published approaches are marked 'N/A Night', then what about the unpublished 'visual approach'? Can it be flown when all the other approaches to the same runway can not?" This more a thought question that looking for a legal interpretation. It is a consideration of 'why' they marked it the way they did.
luvflyin
Touchdown! Greaser!
A Visual Approach gives plenty of time to see obstructions because of the visibility requirement, 3 miles. You will almost always start it from a higher altitude than the MDA on any Instrument Approaches at the airport. I know of no ‘night’ restrictions on the Clearing for, or the Flying of a Visual Approach. Except when there are for some CVFP’s. Charted Visual Flight Procedures. They kinda look like it, but they are not an Instrument Approach. Here’s one…
thito01
Pre-takeoff checklist
For the airport that initiated this thread, there is additional information on the FAA site. https://www.faa.gov/air_traffic/fli...112849FCC81BA455185-M95&type=acifp&nasrId=M95 is the main site for this airport. The pdf (at that web site) https://www.faa.gov/aero_docs/acifp...BA455185-M95/AL_KM95_RNAV GPS RWY 1_A1D_S.pdf actually shows (on the last page) some of the local obstructions.
I see. Legit question. Thanks.
luvflyin
Touchdown! Greaser!
How did you find that? I know of the Instrument Flight Procedures Information Gateway. But not the Airport Procedures Information Gateway. Googling it just returns results for the IFP Gateway.
John Collins
En-Route
It is still on the gateway. Look in the IFP Coordination folder.
thito01
Pre-takeoff checklist
Just luck while poking around. I looked up the airport, then noticed the IFP Documents tab. I found it under that tab.
I have looked at some other airports that I was interested in but I have not found another map view like at M95.