Thread: IFR Questions

Hello

Perhaps a few questions for the likes of McGoo here...

I am used to IFR in New Zealand so getting all the UK laws straight is a bit of a muddle so here are a couple of questions I need help with because I can't for the life of me find the answers in the AIP.

1. Intercepting the localiser. In NZ if you are not yet cleared for the localiser / ILS it was standard procedure to join it regardless despite the clearance or not. In the UK what is the procedure if you are approaching it and yet not yet cleared for it whether it be on vectors or via the procedure? My common sense tells me to just prompt ATC but what if the frequencies were jammed full what technically is the law for joining without a clearance?

2. Filing a takeoff alternate. Takeoff minima is dependent on company SOPs so at present I am using this, however SOPs aside am I right in thinking that a takeoff alternate is required if the landing minima at the aerodrome is below that required for the landing following an immediate return to the aerodrome after take off?

It's funny I ask these questions because last week I sat my Airlaw ATPL! Lets hope I knew enough to have passed

Cheers

Hotdog

Oh, and a quick message for Paul, any chance of an IFR forum or changing this present one to perhaps something along the lines of Advanced training or CPL/IR?!

Hi Hotdog

Sorry, not been online for a while, you've probably answered these by now but anyway.

1, I've never had this happen as there are too many prompts on both sides to miss a clearance, when under radar vectors, as soon as APP tell you "vectoring for an ILS approach", that is your clearance, they will also mark there flight progress strip accordingly, when flying the full procedure for example you call "beacon outbound" or if in the hold and you call ready for the approach, these are all prompts for ATC to give you "cleared for the ILS xx approach" and also to report localiser established etc, although if your unsure a quick confirmation request wont hurt.

2, Your quite right, heres the section from ICAO annex 6 chapter 4:

Take-off alternate. An alternate aerodrome at which an aircraft can land should this become necessary shortly after take-off and it is not possible to use the aerodrome of departure.
A take-off alternate aerodrome shall be selected and specified in the operational flight plan if the weather conditions at the aerodrome of departure are at or below the applicable aerodrome operating minima or it would not be possible to return to the aerodrome of departure for other reasons.
The take-off alternate must be within a specified distance of the departure aerodrome.
For an aerodrome to be selected as a take-off alternate the available information shall indicate that, at the estimated time of use, the conditions will be at or above the aerodrome operating minima for that operation.

Hi McGoo

Cheers for that. Where abouts can I find the copies of the relevent annexes? I always struggle to get hold of them, I mean I know how to get the AIP, JAR OPS, ANO etc but stuff like this I always seem to not be able to find so a link would be good if you could?

Another question that has come up in my study prior to test is the approach ban.... Which is the official explanation regarding an approach ban:

Does an approach ban occur if the required RVR falls below the minimum prior to the FINAL APPROACH POINT or 1000FT ABOVE AERODROME ELEVATION? What I mean is if the RVR is below minima prior to getting to the final approach point (which for example is 1500ft) am I allowed to go past this down to 1000ft above aerodrome level before initiating missed approach because obviously you have better chance of getting visual if you carry on further? I know both are legal statements but Im getting confused as to which one you primarily use. Do you take the lower of the 2 or do you just use the final approach point if so where does 1000ft agl come from? From flying so far we usually talk about not preceding past the the final approach point if the required RVR cannot be met but I dont understand where the statement 1000ft above aerodrome comes from?

Cheers
Hotdog

Hey, I don't have a link, although if you look at sites like skybrary, they have search boxes for ICAO etc, I think its a good site and you can find most things!

regarding the FAP/1000ft, it depends on whether there is an outer marker, heres the relevant section from JAR/OPS:

JAR OPS 1 Subpart D 1.405
Commencement and
continuation of approach

(a) The commander or the pilot to whom
conduct of the flight has been delegated may
commence an instrument approach regardless of the
reported RVR/Visibility but the approach shall not
be continued beyond the outer marker, or equivalent
position, if the reported RVR/visibility is less than
the applicable minima. (See IEM OPS 1.405(a).)

(b) Where RVR is not available, RVR values
may be derived by converting the reported visibility
in accordance with Appendix 1 to JAR-OPS 1.430,
sub-paragraph (h).

(c) If, after passing the outer marker or
equivalent position in accordance with (a) above, the
reported RVR/visibility falls below the applicable
minimum, the approach may be continued to DA/H
or MDA/H.

(d) Where no outer marker or equivalent
position exists, the commander or the pilot to whom
conduct of the flight has been delegated shall make
the decision to continue or abandon the approach
before descending below 1 000 ft above the
aerodrome on the final approach segment. If the
MDA/H is at or above 1 000 ft above the
aerodrome, the operator shall establish a height,
for each approach procedure, below which the
approach shall not be continued if the
RVR/visibility is less than the applicable minima.

(e) The approach may be continued below
DA/H or MDA/H and the landing may be completed
provided that the required visual reference is
established at the DA/H or MDA/H and is
maintained.

(f) The touch-down zone RVR is always
controlling. If reported and relevant, the mid point
and stop end RVR are also controlling. The
minimum RVR value for the mid-point is 125 m or
the RVR required for the touch-down zone if less,
and 75 m for the stop-end. For aeroplanes equipped
with a roll-out guidance or control system,the
minimum RVR value for the mid-point is 75 m.


McGoo

McGoo,

Thanks for that, Skybrary is brilliant, just been searching on it. I think the "or equivilent" has thrown me into believing that the designated final approach point is equivilent to the outer marker. In reality today there doesnt seem to be many places with markers any more so I guess mostly the 1000ft ruling applies and is used the most.

Cheers
Hotdog

No worries!

Just a quick one Mcgoo

Talking to my IR instructor today (ex BA Captain and examiner) I asked about the approach ban and his simple answer was that the UK CAA have decided to just use the 1000ft above aerodrome level ruling and all the other bits and pieces about final approach fixes and markers have been abolished in the UK. This is not to say you are wrong but if anyone reads this thread in my position (flying in the UK only) then for the test you are expected to simply not proceed past 1000ft (QFE) if the RVR is below minima

Hotdog

No problem Hotdog !

If you get a chance could you see if you can get a reference for that, would like to have a read up?

cheers

McGoo

I cant find a reference Mcgoo. Interesting... Maybe its based on the simple observation that the 1000ft AAL ruling is 99% of the time lower than the final approach point / outer marker and therefore if the rule states "either" then your more likely to continue to the 1000ft point because you have better chance of getting visual?