Stupid IFR practice ?'s

Vavso

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 3, 2001
Posts
202
Total Time
1900
Is it true that some FSDO's set there own rules on flying practice approaches while VFR with a safety pilot in there particular area of jurisdiction. If so whats the best way to tell . Also what dictates whether someone requests IFR approaches thru the tower or approach control . Can approach /departure deny your request for paractice IFR in vfr conditions? This came up after reading info from various fsdo's
 
Last edited:

avbug

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 14, 2001
Posts
7,602
Total Time
n/a
Vavso,

Flight Standards District Offices do not set, make, or interpret regulation. FSDO's administer the various programs of the FAA, and initiate enforcement actions. A FSDO, or an inspector at the FSDO level, cannot interpret a regulation with authority, nor can an inspector enforce a regulation which does not exist, or has been altered. The FAA is bound by the FAR every bit as much as certificate holders are.

Practice approaches are legal to conduct without any authorization outside Class B, C, and D airspace. In areas where ATC authorization is required, practice approaches must receive a clearance, and when conducted under VFR, are subject to the same limitations as any other VFR flight.

Practice approaches when conducted under IFR are subject to the same limitations as any IFR clearance, and any other IFR flight.

Practice approaches are instrument approaches, and may be approved by ATC subject to traffic and workload conditions. Pilots performing practice approaches under VFR will be instructed to remain VFR. Pilots desiring practice approaches under IFR must specifically request a practice approach, and must receive an IFR clearance. ATC is not obligated to grant this request.

At airports without a tower, pilots who wish to make practice instrument approaches should notify the facility having control of the desired approach, as indicated on the approach chart.

VFR aircraft executing practice instrument approaches are not automatically authorized to conduct the missed approach proceedure. This authorization must be specifically requested from the controller. Separation will not be provided unless the missed approach has been approved by ATC.

Aircraft cleared for practice approaches must not deviate from the clearance, except in an emergency, or unless the clearance is ammended or the deviation approved by ATC.

See AIM 4-3-22 for details on practice approaches.

You asked about requesting a practice approach, and what facility to use. If you are airborne and talking to approach, make your request with approach. If you are on the ground, make your request with clearance delivery, ground, or the tower, as appropriate. If you intend to execute the practice approaches under IFR, you must obtain an IFR clearance to do so. (Remembering that IFR means instrument rules, not conditions).

Center or approach can deny a request for IFR during a pop-up clearance, workload permitting. You may be instructed to remain VFR. Again, there is a difference between flying IFR approaches, and instrument approaches. Instrument approaches may be conducted in instrument or visual conditions, under IFR, or VFR. However, flight under Instrument Flight Rules (IFR) requires an IFR clearance, an aircraft approved for IFR, and a pilot in command who is rated and legal to fly under IFR, and current under IFR to act as PIC.

Can approach deny your request for practice approaches? Yes.
 

bobbysamd

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 26, 2001
Posts
5,710
Total Time
4565
Practice approaches

Who fed you that line of bull? :rolleyes:

I really can't add much to Avbug's excellent comments except to suggest you review the regs and AIM regarding practice approaches.
 

walkthasky

SWA FO
Joined
Nov 26, 2001
Posts
218
Total Time
some
who are you?

Hey avbug!
I see you make so many reply's on this site, yet no info about you on your profile. You seem like you really know your stuff. Just curious about you. Dont worry, im not coming on to you or anything:D
 

Flyer7SA

Active member
Joined
Nov 27, 2001
Posts
39
Total Time
1200+
What if you are performing practice approaches VFR and the WX is VMC. The approach control clears you for the approach and says, "Cleared for the ILS, runway 27 - maintain 3000 until established, maintain VFR"

So you are instrument rated and the guy under the hood is not and he busts the altitude given, but there is no danger to you or any other aircraft because it is clear and you're watching for traffic. Can you still be busted? Would you, the safety pilot (the one with the instrument rating) be the one busted for the assigned altitude bust? Or would it not matter.

Now let's say that you (now a CFII) take another instrument rated pilot up in the clouds to get recurrent. You go out and shoot a couple of ILS approaches and during an altitude assignment, your student totally busts the altitude. Bells ring off at approach control and you're told that your next approach will terminate with a full stop and you will call the FAA when you land. Now, in that case, what would happen?

Flyer7SA
 

flydog

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 28, 2001
Posts
542
Total Time
2500+
If you deviate from an ATC clearance you are busted regardless of wether it is VMC, IFR, etc. The PIC would be ultimately responsible which would be the CFI or the person occupying the left seat. It takes 300' to ring the bell and a 300' deviation on an ILS approach practice or not is pretty severe. I would think a CFI or safety pilot would intervene long before that
 

avbug

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 14, 2001
Posts
7,602
Total Time
n/a
First of all, a CFII is not automatically the pilot-in-command, nor is the left seat flyer automatically the pillot in command. The designated PIC (not necessarily the person flying the airplane) is ultimately responsible for the outcome of the flight, and the conduct of the flight, and is certainly required to answer for violations occuring during the course of that flight. See FAR 91.3.

The manipulator of the controls, weather acting as pilot in command or not, may also be held liable for a violation of the FAR. There are several ways in which this can be done, but it can be done. Barring other charges, a violation of FAR 91.13 (careless and reckless operation of an aircraft) may be preferred against either party by the FAA in enforcement proceedings, as well as a violation of FAR 91. 123.

During flight under VFR, entering into conditions less than VFR as specified under FAR 91.155 is a violation of that subparagraph. Therefore, we must assume that the subject in this question is in visual conditions. If the flight is conducted under IFR, it doesn't matter if visual or instrument conditions prevail, but for VFR flight and practice approaches, VFR conditions must prevail (or special VFR, with a clearance).

Weather danger exists is a relative term. The issue isn't danger to other aircraft, but adherence to clearance, again as specified in 91.123.

The same criteria applies to the instrument rated flight instructor who is conducting instruction in instrument conditions ("IMC"). A violation of a clearance is a violation of a clearance.

The flight instructor may, or may not be acting as pilot in command. However, enforcement action may be taken against the instructor either way, as well as the student.
 

avbug

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 14, 2001
Posts
7,602
Total Time
n/a
...As for the previous question about me, and my profile, it is void of info because there is nothing to tell. I am the singularly least interesting person who could post a profile; my sole claim to fame is obtaining my pilot certificate from a box of wheaties on cold morning, long ago...
 

Pilotadjuster

I voted for Pedro
Joined
Nov 26, 2001
Posts
340
Total Time
400
ATC

Also--as far as who approves the approach, my experience has been approach control; even under VFR conditions, they have control of the approaches and will hand you off to tower when you enter their part of the airspace, (or if an uncontrolled field, the CTAF) then tower hands you back to approach when you are established on the missed and out of his hair.

Only "problems" I have had with ATC on practice approaches have been when they refuse to vector you to an approach fix due to workload...in which case, your safety pilot/II should be able to "act" as ATC for that portion. I have always been informed "no seperation services provided, maintain VFR".

AVBUG--from your numerous, detailed answers, that must have been a box of Wheaties with Chuck Yeager on the outside....

Fly Safe!

PA
 

avbug

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 14, 2001
Posts
7,602
Total Time
n/a
Hmmm. Interesting. Does that mean I could say I eat Chuck Yeager for breakfast? Actually, I believe he may have been on a box of cereal at one point...I don't recall. He's on everything else.

Approach is required to instruct you to remain VFR if flying under VFR, and to advise you that traffic separation is not provided.

Rather than seeking vectors to final from your safety pilot, shoot the full approach from the IAF. This is much better practice than taking vectors. Vectors take most of the workload out of the approach. Far better to do the full proceedure and take the missed, if you can get it.
 

bobbysamd

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 26, 2001
Posts
5,710
Total Time
4565
Full Approaches and DME arcs

I'll second that one. Another excellent way to hone your skills is to fly full DME arc approaches. I don't remember at the moment what the PTS requires, but if you can keep it within .2 your skills are at a high level.

In fact, try practicing 5 DME acrcs in the sim with the wind turned up full blast. Unrealistic - perhaps, even though there are some 5 DME arc approaches - but a great way to build your skills.
 
Top