Q: IFR Lost Comms - You Make The Call

[TCABM]

I was listening to @write-stuff’s latest IFR mock oral and one of the debrief comments caused me pause. The DPE hit the hammer on lost comms procedures and it made me think about the failure.

Let’s assume you have a Comm/Nav 1 and Comm/Nav 2 and you’ve been cleared to the final destination which has (and advertised) ILS XX as the approach in IMC.

For some reason, C/N1 and C/N2 become INOP five miles from the IAF, you have been cleared for the fix. What do you do?

Same scenario; let’s say complete electrical failure and you’re EFB packed it in early. What do you do?

Point to ponder : do we assume a loss of comms does not equate to a loss of navaids.

PTP2: If you’re late to the clearance limit, do you expect the failure is yours or the FAAs and what warm fuzzy reassures you it’s safe and deconflicted to proceed?

 

[Clip4]

1. You should know where VFR weather is and know if you have the fuel reserve to get there.
2. For a few bucks you can buy a battery to power the IPAD. You do have your EFB on your phone?
3. Arriving late over a clearance limit is good vs arriving too early..
4. If you still have DC, your transponder can alert ATC to your emergency.
5. Work the checklists and try to restore DC/Comm.

 

[bflynn]

Having reserves to fly to vfr is a good personal minimum, but the vfr may close in unexpectedly.

Double check coms set up, go back to previous channel, try guard. Transponder to 7600. If on battery, just for a couple of minutes, then off, shed load. Am I early and need to hold?

that’s the end of lost comms. Obviously you still have the emergency that you have to land somewhere.

Do I still have gps and is there a rnav? Yes, fly it. It’s an emergency, with no vfr options probably fly the rnav past minimums if you have to. You’re down to picking the best bad option.

If all the electrics are dead with no vfr options then you have a critical emergency. The efb is still not navigation, but it can provide situational awareness so you’re not totally blind.

In the plane I usually fly with a gtn650 the most likely answer is going to be fly to vfr. If it was a g1000, the answer is probably to continue.

 

[douglas393]

Back up radio. Cost less than 500 dollars. Many have rudimentary navigation as well. Know it's a cop out,, but like my master card I never leave home without it. That being said it's an emergency. Use transponder, if vmc field available that's where I go, otherwise if possible I fly my plan using whatever I have to help me with that, if not then the closest field I can get to and land safely. My goal is to land safely, once that is accomplished I will deal with the feds, locals, whoever, but better to arrive alive than not.

 

[Pinecone]

If both navs are out, how would you fly the approach???

The answer to the last is, they will clear all around you. Remember, they can still see you, even if your transponder is inop. The lost comm procedures were developed for non-radar environments.

 

[luvflyin]

I was listening to @write-stuff’s latest IFR mock oral and one of the debrief comments caused me pause. The DPE hit the hammer on lost comms procedures and it made me think about the failure.

Let’s assume you have a Comm/Nav 1 and Comm/Nav 2 and you’ve been cleared to the final destination which has (and advertised) ILS XX as the approach in IMC.

For some reason, C/N1 and C/N2 become INOP five miles from the IAF, you have been cleared for the fix. What do you do?

Same scenario; let’s say complete electrical failure and you’re EFB packed it in early. What do you do?

Point to ponder : do we assume a loss of comms does not equate to a loss of navaids.

PTP2: If you’re late to the clearance limit, do you expect the failure is yours or the FAAs and what warm fuzzy reassures you it’s safe and deconflicted to proceed?

Can you give the link to @write-stuff ’s mock oral?

 

[TCABM]

Can you give the link to @write-stuff ’s mock oral?

 

[dtuuri]

3. Arriving late over a clearance limit is good vs arriving too early..

The lost comm procedures were developed for non-radar environments.

Without holding instructions and an EFC when cleared to the destination — there's no place nor time to hold until. Lost comm procedures specifically include radar environments. They don't include GPS.

 

[TCABM]

…that’s the end of lost comms...

That kind if misses the point I realized last night. Failure analysis.

Did just the comm transmitter fail?
Did the comm transmitter AND receiver side fail?
Did the Nav receiver fail as well?

Same questions for Comm2/Nav2.

Did the CB for either or both sides of either radio pop in conjunction with or causing the failure?

Then there’s the POH which states “the radio transmitter relay is protected by the NAV LT circuit breaker”…any malfunction in the nav light system deactivates both nav lights and transmitter relay. Turn nav lights off, reset NAV LT CB, reset CB to reactivate transmitter relay. Do not turn nav lights on until nav light malfunction is corrected.

Total electrical failure is rare, but I had one (electrical fire) while VFR having already been switched to unicom. Thankfully nobody else was around so it was a relatively simple solution given the problem; in the video, the DPE hammered lost comms, but didn’t really discuss anything related to nav systems that may be collateral damage and how that could play out in IMC.

 

[brcase]

Did just the comm transmitter fail?
Did the comm transmitter AND receiver side fail?
Did the Nav receiver fail as well?

might want to add,

Did Headset fail.
Did Headset Connector fail.

One of our DPE's tells the story of shooting an approach with his headset plugged into the co-pilot side and using the co-pilot PTT for communications after a failure of the pilot side Headset connector.

Brian
CFIIG/ASEL

 

[TCABM]

might want to add,

Did Headset fail.
Did Headset Connector fail.

One of our DPE's tells the story of shooting an approach with his headset plugged into the co-pilot side and using the co-pilot PTT for communications after a failure of the pilot side Headset connector.

Brian
CFIIG/ASEL

Yeah, one of the planes I’m flying on the side has a headset transmit jack that’s sensitive to the jack being inserted just exactly not quite all the way in for it to work flawlessly.

 

[Tools]

Either scenario indicates inability to navigate. That trumps lost comms.

There is ONE answer, do WHAT EVER you have to, to avoid perishing. Simple.

 

[Clip4]

If both navs are out, how would you fly the approach???

The answer to the last is, they will clear all around you. Remember, they can still see you, even if your transponder is inop. The lost comm procedures were developed for non-radar environments.

I know a lot of airports where they can’t see you on primary radar.

 

[luvflyin]

That kind if misses the point I realized last night. Failure analysis.

Did just the comm transmitter fail?
Did the comm transmitter AND receiver side fail?
Did the Nav receiver fail as well?

Same questions for Comm2/Nav2.

Did the CB for either or both sides of either radio pop in conjunction with or causing the failure?

Then there’s the POH which states “the radio transmitter relay is protected by the NAV LT circuit breaker”…any malfunction in the nav light system deactivates both nav lights and transmitter relay. Turn nav lights off, reset NAV LT CB, reset CB to reactivate transmitter relay. Do not turn nav lights on until nav light malfunction is corrected.

Total electrical failure is rare, but I had one (electrical fire) while VFR having already been switched to unicom. Thankfully nobody else was around so it was a relatively simple solution given the problem; in the video, the DPE hammered lost comms, but didn’t really discuss anything related to nav systems that may be collateral damage and how that could play out in IMC.

If you in the goo and you have no navigational gadgets at all, it's time start hoping you'll get in the clear sometime soon. Hopefully at least few hundred feet above the ground, and start thinking in terms of fly the airplane until the crash is over with and do it as slow as possible.

 

[luvflyin]

That was the Private mock. This is the Instrument. Agghhh!!!" One and a half hours. I may get around to it someday

 

[EdFred]

So in this impossible scenario all of the following failed:

Com 1
Nav 1
Com 2
Nav 2
GPS
Xponder
Panel EFB
Phone with separate software from panel EFB
Tablet with separate software from Phone

Yeah, screw that. I tell the DPE to go **** himself.

 

[TCABM]

So in this impossible scenario all of the following failed:

Com 1
Nav 1
Com 2
Nav 2
GPS
Xponder
Panel EFB
Phone with separate software from panel EFB
Tablet with separate software from Phone

Yeah, screw that. I tell the DPE to go **** himself.

Not quite. The DPE was only focused on lost comms. My scenario was taking the electrical fire I had a few years ago and putting it IMC. I had never really put it in that context before.

The cure required killing power at the master (power to the main buss was shorting due to frayed insulation), which left me with an Aspen E5 on battery backup, a G5 on battery backup, and a sectional; I hadn’t switched to an EFBs at that point and it was my trigger for switching to the EFB.

 

[asicer]

That was the Private mock. This is the Instrument. Agghhh!!!" One and a half hours. I may get around to it someday

I hit the "transcript" button and skimmed the text. Lost comms starts at 1:20:08.

As mentioned in post #17, the DPE only failed a COM radio. It was the OP that failed all the other items (NAV1, NAV2, GPS, XPDR, panel EFB, handheld, phone and tablet).

 

[luvflyin]

I hit the "transcript" button and skimmed the text. Lost comms starts at 1:20:08.

As mentioned in post #17, the DPE only failed a COM radio. It was the OP that failed all the other items (NAV1, NAV2, GPS, XPDR, panel EFB, handheld, phone and tablet).

Thx for taking the time to do that.

 

[Clip4]

Without holding instructions and an EFC when cleared to the destination — there's no place nor time to hold until. Lost comm procedures specifically include radar environments. They don't include GPS.

Assuming you filed a flight plan with an ETE and were issued a clearance stating the destination, you have a clearance limit…. upon arrival over the clearance limit, and proceed to a fix from which an approach begins and commence descent or descent and approach as close as possible to the estimated time of arrival as calculated from the filed or amended (with ATC) estimated time en route.

Simply file an ETE a few minutes less than estimated and you will always commence the approach as close as possible to your filed ETE/ETA.

 

[mandm]

Lost comms in IMC, fly as planned, put in 7600, land.

Lost comms in IMC, this is an emergency, also depends on your fuel and what equipment is working. I’d be using foreflight or backup equipment, if my situational awareness is good I’ll continue. If not, climb and fly to VMC.

Lost comms in VMC, land VFR at non-towered airport. Alternatively in controlled airspace, overfly the tower to get their attention, you might get some light signals, land if needed.

All depends on fuel remaining and situational awareness.

 

[midlifeflyer]

Lost comms in IMC, fly as planned, put in 7600, land.

What if your planned destination was a Class B primary?

 

[midlifeflyer]

Know the priority rules of 91.185 but follow the first paragraph of the AIM guidance.

 

[mandm]

What if your planned destination was a Class B primary?

If my situational awareness and navaids are good, and everything nearby is IMC, I’ll continue to land. Or if I can swap to a less busy airport maybe that’s the better option, again depends on fuel remaining, what you are familiar with. Too many variables to assume though, and we don’t know the whole situation.

 

[midlifeflyer]

If my situational awareness and navaids are good, and everything nearby is IMC, I’ll continue to land. Or if I can swap to a less busy airport maybe that’s the better option, again depends on fuel remaining, what you are familiar with. Too many variables to assume though, and we don’t know the whole situation.

i guess the question is, are you willing to shut down the Class B airspace instead ot diverting to a suitable alternate? According to controllers, that's what will happen,

 

[dtuuri]

Assuming you filed a flight plan with an ETE and were issued a clearance stating the destination, you have a clearance limit…. upon arrival over the clearance limit, and proceed to a fix from which an approach begins and commence descent or descent and approach as close as possible to the estimated time of arrival as calculated from the filed or amended (with ATC) estimated time en route.

Simply file an ETE a few minutes less than estimated and you will always commence the approach as close as possible to your filed ETE/ETA.

With all due respect, you're as confused as the Chief Counsel. I recently tried to explain, again, the history of this rule as one who's lived through the evolution of it in real time. At the time, during examiner recurrent training and annual simulator recurrent training the new changes were explained during ground school sessions. I, for one, was like you are now. That's why I remember it well. It shook up my understanding. That was about forty years ago! I recently posted another explanation in this thread, starting here: https://www.pilotsofamerica.com/community/threads/assess-my-7600-actions.144198/#post-3437932

 

[mark.staggs]

i guess the question is, are you willing to shut down the Class B airspace instead ot diverting to a suitable alternate? According to controllers, that's what will happen,

I think I mentioned it in the other thread @dtuuri referenced above, but the Opposing Bases guys presented this particular scenario on an episode of theirs earlier this year. They suggested that, rather than muck up the whole works at a large Class B airport, if possible divert to a smaller, quieter Class C or uncontrolled field if weather and fuel reasonably allowed for it. Even if the Class B airport was the destination filed.

I think their words, paraphrased, was to get on the ground and out of everyone's way as soon as reasonable regardless as to what was filed rather than to just go strictly by 91.185 for every scenario. It sounds like ATC doesn't know what your expected arrival time is or really care and just wants you to stop being their problem.

Personally, the choice that makes it less likely that I'm on the evening news for shutting down a major airport, the better.

 

[midlifeflyer]

I think I mentioned it in the other thread @dtuuri referenced above, but the Opposing Bases guys presented this particular scenario on an episode of theirs earlier this year. They suggested that, rather than muck up the whole works at a large Class B airport, if possible divert to a smaller, quieter Class C or uncontrolled field if weather and fuel reasonably allowed for it. Even if the Class B airport was the destination filed.

I think their words, paraphrased, was to get on the ground and out of everyone's way as soon as reasonable regardless as to what was filed rather than to just go strictly by 91.185 for every scenario. It sounds like ATC doesn't know what your expected arrival time is or really care and just wants you to stop being their problem.

Personally, the choice that makes it less likely that I'm on the evening news for shutting down a major airport, the better.

I'm familiar with the episode and commented on it when the haters came out.

AG and RH said the same thing as every other controller I've heard talk about it.

 

[Clip4]

With all due respect, you're as confused as the Chief Counsel. I recently tried to explain, again, the history of this rule as one who's lived through the evolution of it in real time. At the time, during examiner recurrent training and annual simulator recurrent training the new changes were explained during ground school sessions. I, for one, was like you are now. That's why I remember it well. It shook up my understanding. That was about forty years ago! I recently posted another explanation in this thread, starting here: https://www.pilotsofamerica.com/community/threads/assess-my-7600-actions.144198/#post-3437932

What I said, Leave clearance limit at the EFC time or upon arrival over the clearance limit. Proceed to a fix from which an approach begins and commence descent and approach as close as possible to the ETA as calculated from the filed or amended ETE. In the RNAV world there are plenty of ways to be close to ETE without holding. Any approach you want, any fix you want.

https://www.faasafety.gov/files/gslac/courses/content/38/483/Lost%20Com%20Graphic.pdf

 

[Tools]

Personally, the choice that makes it less likely that I'm on the evening news for shutting down a major airport, the better.

Hmmm… it’s kinda always been a bucket list item of mine to land my Piet at atlanta hartsfield.

Tools, workin out the details…

 

[dtuuri]

What I said, Leave clearance limit at the EFC time or upon arrival over the clearance limit.

No, you said "Assuming you filed a flight plan with an ETE and were issued a clearance stating the destination, you have a clearance limit…."

The whole point of my cited post is that "clearance limit" only makes sense if it means "holding fix" which is what it historically did mean. If your "destination" is an airport and you have no way to navigate there except via an SIAP, how do you arrive and then leave under 91.185 if you have no way to get there in the first place?

 

[Clip4]

No, you said "Assuming you filed a flight plan with an ETE and were issued a clearance stating the destination, you have a clearance limit…."

The whole point of my cited post is that "clearance limit" only makes sense if it means "holding fix" which is what it historically did mean. If your "destination" is an airport and you have no way to navigate there except via an SIAP, how do you arrive and then leave under 91.185 if you have no way to get there in the first place?

The regulation addresses only communication failure. The regulation includes when the clearance limit is where an approach begins (ie VOR on the airport) or if the clearance limit is not where an approach begins

With a typical as filed clearance today you do have a clearance limit (the destination) a route (direct) and an assigned altitude. The regulation expects you to fly the assigned route (direct to the destination airport) at the assigned altitude (but don’t run into something) then fly to an IAP on any approach you little heart desires for that airport and then start the descent and approach as closely as possible to the ETE/ETA, which should be expired after you just flew 10 miles from the airport and did a course reversal.

If you don’t have navigation, 91.185 is not applicable.

 

[dtuuri]

The regulation addresses only communication failure. The regulation includes when the clearance limit is where an approach begins (ie VOR on the airport) or if the clearance limit is not where an approach begins

With a typical as filed clearance today you do have a clearance limit (the destination) a route (direct) and an assigned altitude. The regulation expects you to fly the assigned route (direct to the destination airport) at the assigned altitude (but don’t run into something) then fly to an IAP on any approach you little heart desires for that airport and then start the descent and approach as closely as possible to the ETE/ETA, which should be expired after you just flew 10 miles from the airport and did a course reversal.

If you don’t have navigation, 91.185 is not applicable.

I'm saying you DO have navigation but can't fly to the airport without an SIAP. Think VOR only. You can end your filed route description after any fix (or no fix at all) with "direct", but that doesn't mean you should go direct to the airport if you're cleared to your destination and only have VOR for navigation. It means you go from your last listed fix to the IAF of your choice as all the airspace is cleared at your last approved altitude for every IAF to the airport. You want to use RNAV and go over top of the airport first? Ok, just put K___ in the route description and again in the destination airport box. Seems looney to me, but whatever...

 

[Palmpilot]

I think I mentioned it in the other thread @dtuuri referenced above, but the Opposing Bases guys presented this particular scenario on an episode of theirs earlier this year. They suggested that, rather than muck up the whole works at a large Class B airport, if possible divert to a smaller, quieter Class C or uncontrolled field if weather and fuel reasonably allowed for it. Even if the Class B airport was the destination filed.

I think their words, paraphrased, was to get on the ground and out of everyone's way as soon as reasonable regardless as to what was filed rather than to just go strictly by 91.185 for every scenario. It sounds like ATC doesn't know what your expected arrival time is or really care and just wants you to stop being their problem.

Personally, the choice that makes it less likely that I'm on the evening news for shutting down a major airport, the better.

That episode is OB278, from 5/1/2023. The lost comm discussion starts about 27 minutes in.

Opposing Bases Air Traffic Talk

A weekly internet show about aviation, flying, and air traffic control. "Alpha Golf" and "Romeo Hotel" are both rated pilots and air traffic controllers!

www.opposingbases.com

 

[Clip4]

I'm saying you DO have navigation but can't fly to the airport without an SIAP. Think VOR only. You can end your filed route description after any fix (or no fix at all) with "direct", but that doesn't mean you should go direct to the airport if you're cleared to your destination and only have VOR for navigation. It means you go from your last listed fix to the IAF of your choice as all the airspace is cleared at your last approved altitude for every IAF to the airport. You want to use RNAV and go over top of the airport first? Ok, just put K___ in the route description and again in the destination airport box. Seems looney to me, but whatever...

Since the number of airports served by a VOR approach are rather few these days, good luck with that.

 

[dtuuri]

Since the number of airports served by a VOR approach are rather few these days, good luck with that.

Still more than a thousand, but you're missing the point. The rule wasn't made in anticipation of any pilot flying over the airport before executing an approach. Why would you even want to do that for an RNAV (GPS), though you could? Fudging your ETE to artificially create an arrival time that makes you late on every flight, like you proposed, just so you don't have to hold if you arrive earlier, is ridiculous because there's no requirement to hold anyway unless you have received holding instructions and an EFC. Of course, in an emergency you can get away with anything you can sell to the FAA and, luckily, the Chief Counsel is as confused about this as you are.

 

[Clip4]

Still more than a thousand, but you're missing the point. The rule wasn't made in anticipation of any pilot flying over the airport before executing an approach. Why would you even want to do that for an RNAV (GPS), though you could? Fudging your ETE to artificially create an arrival time that makes you late on every flight, like you proposed, just so you don't have to hold if you arrive earlier, is ridiculous because there's no requirement to hold anyway unless you have received holding instructions and an EFC. Of course, in an emergency you can get away with anything you can sell to the FAA and, luckily, the Chief Counsel is as confused about this as you are.

Ok, please show me the part of the regulation that says leave the assigned route at an any random location and proceed to an IAP?

 

[TCABM]

… in an emergency you can get away with anything you can sell to the FAA …

In the scenario of both lost comms and lost navs, I think that’s what it comes down to.

Given my plane, which is dual G5s + steam, a GTN, and a KX155 w/lateral guidance, a total loss of electrical power leaves me with an EFB, 30-45mins backup battery, and a whiskey compass. I think finding the nearest airport in VMC or nearest quiet airport with an SIAP of any type is about the only option.

Even though we have ADSB in/out in panel, the stratux w/AHRS chip I have suddenly becomes important from a situational awareness stand point.

 

[dtuuri]

Ok, please show me the part of the regulation that says leave the assigned route at an any random location and proceed to an IAP?

Not from "any random location" — you're obliged by the rule to fly the cleared/flight planned route. Presumably, that route description terminates at a location (fix) where you have the ability to safely continue your navigation to an IAF. Once at the IAF, you may descend as the enroute portion is ended there. For somebody loosely filing "direct" the entire way, I can see this causing the impression you mentioned of "any random location". For them, in our age of precision navigation, this must cause heartburn. Really though, their flight planning should have assured themselves that a track from any point of radio failure to the IAF was viable both obstruction and signal-wise. From ATC's center perspective, the geometry between a track to the airport and one to an IAF from beyond the terminal area would hardly be noticeable. Once inside the terminal area it would hardly be important — TRACON's going to protect all the approaches anyway.

 

[Palmpilot]

Ok, please show me the part of the regulation that says leave the assigned route at an any random location and proceed to an IAP?

While not a regulation, these paragraphs in the AIM amount to a virtual blank check to do anything that would reasonably qualify as good judgment under whatever circumstances exist during the communications failure:

6−4−1. Two-way Radio Communications Failure​

​

a. It is virtually impossible to provide regulations and procedures applicable to all possible situations​

associated with two-way radio communications failure. During two-way radio communications failure, when​

confronted by a situation not covered in the regulation, pilots are expected to exercise good judgment in ​

whatever action they elect to take. Should the situation so dictate they should not be reluctant to use​

the emergency action contained in 14 CFR Section 91.3(b).​

​

b. Whether two-way communications failure constitutes an emergency depends on the circumstances, and in​

any event, it is a determination made by the pilot. 14 CFR Section 91.3(b) authorizes a pilot to deviate from any​

rule in Subparts A and B to the extent required to meet an emergency.​

[emphasis added.]​

​

As an example, I would say that coming into a busy class B airport with lost comm would create enough hazard to oneself and others to qualify as an emergency if there were safe alternatives available.