Full procedure or not

[loopa]

Hey everybody, I would like to get a discussion going on what you guys think regarding this IFR scenario.

You are arriving an airport with an NDB/DME or NDB approach and you are IFR. Centre clears you out of controlled airspace, it's one of those heavy IMC days and everything is socked in. No UNICOM available at the airport so you have to shoot this one available approach down to circling minima to figure out the winds and runway conditions.

If you are equipped with an IFR certified GPS, do you have to do a full procedure ndb approach if you are the only IFR traffic there? is there anything illegal about following the 100 safe, 25 safe, then within 10nm OBS the inbound track and descend to procedure turn altitude, and then once past PT inbound, down to circling MDA? As long as you do your 5 min, turning final, faf/3 min, visual call what's wrong with the above scenario? I say this because if this was VMC, an IFR traffic would continue direct the airport, cross overhead and determine the active runway and join the appropriate downwind, or if UNICOM was given, they would just go direct the FAF and shoot the VISUAL approach from there. While IMC makes it a requirement to shoot an approach, does it require it to be full procedure if you can by pass it with a safe practice? I know that this is what the majority of operators do for "operational efficiency" but are there any legal stipulations on doing it this way?

I have heard controversy about these two and I haven't personally been able to find it in a book that there's anything illegal about the above operation.

What if there are two traffic? Have one hold over the NDB at the 100 safe, while the other does the full procedure? Why not have one hold over the NDB at the 100 safe while the other does the method mentioned above?

Fire away! I'm interested in hearing your opinion!

[Colonel Sanders]

do you have to do a full procedure ndb approach if you are the only IFR traffic there?

This questions comes up here about once a year or so. If you do a search,
I'm sure you can find the previous threads.

Bottom line is that without a published IF, you legally have to do the full
procedure by going to the IAF (eg NDB) first, then do a procedure turn
to descend/establish yourself on the final approach track.

It's awfully tempting to vector yourself to the final approach track using
your IFR GPS - it's an IFR-approved method of measuring your distance
from the NDB (FAF) - but it ain't kosher.

Now, that's not to say that no one is doing it! I've never seen anyone
charged with this, but I'm sure there are people who will get all upset
about this, even though it's perfectly safe.

[Bede]

Bottom line is that without a published IF, you legally have to do the full
procedure by going to the IAF (eg NDB) first, then do a procedure turn
to descend/establish yourself on the final approach track.

It's awfully tempting to vector yourself to the final approach track using
your IFR GPS - it's an IFR-approved method of measuring your distance
from the NDB (FAF) - but it ain't kosher.

Can you please provide a reference because I think you're wrong.

What about doing a GPS overlay for an NDB approach? Is that also illegal? You are legally required not to descend below PT altitude until, usually, 10NM. If you're assured via your GPS that you're within your 10NM, there is nothing anywhere that I know of that says you have to do a turn over the beacon. I think if you do this at any airport without radar control, you're going to piss off a lot of people.

I have worked for a couple of big airlines in this country and have never done a full procedure approach. At night in places like YQT, YXE, YQR, etc there is no radar vectors to final and we have always gone straight in using the GPS.

[loopa]

Just like Bede I'm interested in the reference to CS statement, because it always is a controversy between what CS says and what I and Bede said.

And to be clear we are talking about our old traditional non precision approaches here that have published Pturns.

Approaches like the RNAV's that have the IF's obviously get followed, because I don't know why I would just go direct the FAF on a heavy IMC day and give my self 4 miles of play room being low and slow. I rather follow the T which I believe is also the legal way of doing it because just like CS said, there's an IF published (unless there somehow was a transition to a latter stage of the approach).

I think the discussion that comes up in the "legality" is between an approach having "NO PT" published or not on the chart.

For example, if an approach has a NO PT, then you can do the straight in thing, but if it doesn't have a NO PT, then you have to legally do the full proc. And this is the CAR that I'm interested to see if it exists or not, cause I couldn't find it. It sure seems to be one of those things pilot's always hmm and haa about.

Cheers !

[GTAFI]

Have a read.


http://avwxworkshops.com/magazines/Denn ... reTurn.pdf

[Beefitarian]

If you are equipped with an IFR certified GPS, do you have to do a full procedure ndb approach if you are the only IFR traffic there? is there anything illegal about following the 100 safe, 25 safe, then within 10nm OBS the inbound track and descend to procedure turn altitude, and then once past PT inbound, down to circling MDA? As long as you do your 5 min, turning final, faf/3 min, visual call what's wrong with the above scenario?

Do you have a legal obligation to do the full proceedure if you are entering Class C and there's no other traffic or can you just tell them you're going to do a modified GPS approach? I'm not asking just to be a jerk. I'm wondering what the point is to all the stuff you're trying to avoid doing if no one else is around. Because I'm ignorant of IFR proceedures I think of them as having some purpose and so I consider them important. Maybe I'm stuck in the early 1990s with Cat Driver when there was no public GPS and Loran was for rich guys.

[loopa]

Thanks for posting that; however, in uncontrolled airspace you are being "cleared out of uncontrolled airspace." So you are no longer not only not being given "vectors to final approach," ATC is giving you full responsibility for IFR separation from other traffic as well. So technically if you meet the requirements of providing your own IFR separation through VHF communications on 26.7 and the local ATF, can't you do what ever you want?

I can see where this might get confused with a Class E control zone mandated by an MF where you might have to do the full procedure if there are several IFR traffic inbound. Basically you put the latter IFR traffic in a hold while ONE completes the approach, then the second leaves the hold and, does the full procedure, etc. Or couldn't you technically have each IFR traffic hold at their last filed waypoint and then just shoot the straight in?

While the article posted helps explain the need for a Pturn or not (with regards to ATC, which tells me it was written for "controlled airspace), the article doesn't discriminate the regs for uncontrolled (class G) requirements.

Cheers!

[loopa]

]Do you have a legal obligation to do the full proceedure if you are entering Class C and there's no other traffic or can you just tell them you're going to do a modified GPS approach?

No offence taken at all, good question. If I'm in class C, chances are highly that I'm either flying an STAR with instructions of what to do at the end of it, or I'm taken off of a STAR/ given radar vectors to final, in which case at the end they will clear me for the "straight-in" or "what ever" approach. However, now that there's no ATC involved since I've been cleared out of "controlled airspace," are there really any legal obligations to shoot the full procedure? Because the article posted above simply talks about the necessity of when to conduct a full procedure in a controlled environment since it talks about the involvement of ATC.

Cheers!

[Colonel Sanders]

Why not search for the previous threads on this subject?

It's all been done before ....

[Ned Ryerson]

Personally, I would just use the MILS. Available all runways