IFR Minimum Altitudes

[tired of the ground]

So lets say you're flying in a mountainous area with a high 100 & 25 safe (9k and 7k feet). It's 2500ft ovc and you're cleared for the approach.

Can you descend visually below the 100 & 25 safe as long as you remain clear of cloud and can provide terrain separation allowing you to do a straight in, instead of a shuttling procedure turn.

[altiplano]

Yes.

[D5GRVTY]

About the only thing I would add is that if you have been cleared for the approach and you will be maneuvering outside of IFR altitudes or procedures (esp if a straight in is not auth) then ask for the contact approach to keep everything legal.

D5

[app flap]

that would a contact approach... would it not?

[FullReverse]

...careful though, if you do request the contact approach, you are still required to maintain 1000 feet over the highest obstacle within 5 NM of the aeroplane. If said airport is located in a valley, like say Castlegar, then you cant legally do a contact approach.

Depending on equipment and approaches available, you can still fly a straight-in approach to most IFR aerodromes.

FR

[wallypilot]

You must request a contact approach.

...careful though, if you do request the contact approach, you are still required to maintain 1000 feet over the highest obstacle within 5 NM of the aeroplane. If said airport is located in a valley, like say Castlegar, then you cant legally do a contact approach.

That's not correct. You only have to maintain 1he 1000ft/5nm until you have the required visual reference to ground is obtained. See the quote from the AIM below:

In accordance with CAR 602.124, the aircraft shall be flown at an altitude of at least 1 000 ft above the highest obstacle located within a horizontal radius of 5 NM from the estimated position of the aircraft in flight until the required visual reference is acquired in order to conduct a normal landing.

cheers
wp

[Splatm]

But if it is OVC025 you are going to be back into the soup before completing the approach. That would rule out a contact approach.

[brokenwing]

cancel ifr if you can go visual.... then you can do whatever the hell you want.

[tired of the ground]

No Cancelling IFR and No Contact approaches are allowed because you still have to do the IFR approach. The only reason to do this would be so you don't have to do a shuttling procedure turn or high decent rates to make minimums.


Please, continue.

[FullReverse]

That's not correct. You only have to maintain 1he 1000ft/5nm until you have the required visual reference to ground is obtained.

and

"required visual reference" is - in respect of an aircraft on an approach to a runway, means that portion of the approach area of the runway or those visual aids that, when viewed by the pilot of the aircraft, enable the pilot to make an assessment of the aircraft position and rate of change of position, in order to continue the approach and complete a landing.

So wallypilot, you are telling that you can do a contact approach, hence deviate from the approach procedure, into say Castlegar (since this example is being used), while it is OVC020!?!!? So at what point, during your decent IN CLOUD do you have the "required visual reference (not to mention the 'operating clear of cloud' part)

[FullReverse]

cancel ifr if you can go visual.... then you can do whatever the hell you want.

again, no good. Not if you have a cloud deck beneith you.

Stay IFR, do the approach straight-in, if you avionics and chosen approach permits it. Otherwise, you are stuck doing a procedure turn, which really is NOT a big deal unless you are in some pretty shitty icing conditions (which is not uncommon for a place like CYCG).

FR

[185/310]

Lets say your coming into this airport with higher MSA's and there reporting overcast at 2000ft, you get cleared for the approach but you already have the airport visual, request the contact or cancel IFR, the 2000 overcast layer could just be over the airport, and if your planning on doing a straight in it wouldnt be an issue anyways because you would most likely be lower then the cloud deck once closer in, it would save time and its still safe.

[altiplano]

If said airport is located in a valley, like say Castlegar, then you cant legally do a contact approach.

I agree with Wally - that is wrong.

"required visual reference" is - in respect of an aircraft on an approach...

The visual reference you are referring to is to continue an instrument approach beyond the MDA/DH. Not the visual reference required to conduct a contact approach. If that were the case we'd only be able to do a contact from short final some days...

So at what point, during your decent IN CLOUD do you have the "required visual reference

The example in the initial post assumes being clear of cloud. But if I were descending between layers on an approach I could take cloud tops and be legal on a contact.

OVC 2500' doesn't mean that's the conditions everywhere either - it is at the airport - right overhead - having ceilings at the destination but being able to descend visually and land happens everyday.

Also nothing says you have to make a procedure turn just because "NO PT" isn't printed at a fix. If you can make the decent rate and shoot the approach straight in you're good. I always like to ask for the option on the contact because it lets you deviate at your discretion.

[wallypilot]

That's not correct. You only have to maintain 1he 1000ft/5nm until you have the required visual reference to ground is obtained.

and

"required visual reference" is - in respect of an aircraft on an approach to a runway, means that portion of the approach area of the runway or those visual aids that, when viewed by the pilot of the aircraft, enable the pilot to make an assessment of the aircraft position and rate of change of position, in order to continue the approach and complete a landing.

So wallypilot, you are telling that you can do a contact approach, hence deviate from the approach procedure, into say Castlegar (since this example is being used), while it is OVC020!?!!? So at what point, during your decent IN CLOUD do you have the "required visual reference (not to mention the 'operating clear of cloud' part)

Nope, never said that, or at least never meant to imply that. It appears I have to be more thorough, and can't assume so much. What is it they say about assumptions?

anyways, a contact approach can only be requested if there is a reasonable expectation of continuing to land with visual reference to the earth. In other words, the contact approach requires visual conditions, at the aerodrome (specific conditions stated in the AIM) and the aircraft to be in visual conditions when the IFR approach procedure is deviated from, and expect to continue visually all the way to landing.

Example: Castlegar, since you mentioned it. Imagine 4000 SCT, embedded tops around 16000,with a OVC layer around 10000 that you're coming up to the edge of, but below it is good VFR. 100nm safe is 13,400, you're 36 miles away, but you're about to punch into a cloud(one of the SCT ones)....and this would leave you IMC above the OVC layer....you could descend to get below it before(ie while you still have visual reference to the earth) the edge of the OVC layer....but you can't descend below 13400 to cancel. but the weather is fine below for a visual manouver to land. When ATC clears you for the approach, you request a contact, and this allows you to descend below 13400 VISUALLY, not if you are in cloud.

Does that clear things up?

[tired of the ground]

woops.... misread a post

[brokenwing]

why can't you cancel below 13 400? and a contact approach is 1sm FLIGHT VISIBILITY with reason to believe you can make it to the airport. if the ovc layer is 4000 agl... why not request MVA and see if you can punch through?

[SAR_YQQ]

If we are to assume that this pilot does not/cannot cancel IFR and is not familiar enough with the area to try the Contact Approach - he must continue flying the approach to the prescribed minimums.

If he sees a hole in the broken layer below him and thinks he recognizes the area (ie Hwy 4) - he must cancel IFR and proceed at his own discretion. At which point for all intents and purposes he is VFR with IFR alerting services still open.

[wallypilot]

why can't you cancel below 13 400? and a contact approach is 1sm FLIGHT VISIBILITY with reason to believe you can make it to the airport. if the ovc layer is 4000 agl... why not request MVA and see if you can punch through?

you misread.....i mean to say, that you can't descend below 13400 because that is the minimum IFR safe....so therefore, you can't cancel. You can only descend below 13400 if you request and are cleared for the contact approach. Of course, if the floor of the class B airspace is 18000, well then you could cancel.

[wallypilot]

If we are to assume that this pilot does not/cannot cancel IFR and is not familiar enough with the area to try the Contact Approach - he must continue flying the approach to the prescribed minimums.

If he sees a hole in the broken layer below him and thinks he recognizes the area (ie Hwy 4) - he must cancel IFR and proceed at his own discretion. At which point for all intents and purposes he is VFR with IFR alerting services still open.

True, however, for pilots familiar with the area, they see that spot, yet are not legally permitted to descend below 12500, (perhaps because in the Castlegar example, the 100nm safe is 13400, IFR sector is 13600, and you are 41 miles back) you can't really cancel IFR, can you? Therefore, the option for the contact is required to get below 12,500 so that you can cancel. Gotta love flying among the rocks!

[altiplano]

You could also request to maneuver/descend visually with your own terrain.

[Croissant Wrench]

You could also request to maneuver/descend visually with your own terrain.

This only applies if you are being radar vectored.

[oldtimer]

Boy oh boy! I sure hope most of you posters are just rampies or other NON-FLYING people because if you guys ever try to fly IFR in the mountains of BC with your knowledge and attitude, you are going to end up very dead. SAR_YQQ will have to come in to scrape the splatter off the face of some damn mountain. There would not be enough pieces to pick up. If I were ever to end up on your airplane, I would wind the altimeter down to zero and get the hell out before I get hurt.
Here is my suggestion, forget the rules and regulations and how I can circumvent the published charts. Spend a lot of time with a VFR chart beside the the approach plates and low enroutes and STUDY. STUDY STUDY. Every little detail. Then look up the regulations. Then you should know what the hell you are doing.
Never do anything stupid - quickly.
Here is a question, you are IFR in a Navajo with 4 passengers to Prince George but have to pick up one more passenger in Quesnel and then carry on. What woud you use as minimum weather to complete the mission?
P.S. you also have an IFR approved GPS and you are trained and certified to use it.

[altiplano]

-

[wallypilot]

Not sure about what you are getting at on your post oldtimer...

I fly regularly in BC and haven't put one into a mountain yet, nor come close nor do I intend to. If weather permits and contact/visual/canceling are feasible what's the problem? I don't think anyone here is talking about blowing altitudes while IMC or how to circumvent regulations, rather how to work safely and efficiently within the regulations.

I agree a having a VNC and using it are important.

I fly every day in BC as well...and safely, in all types of weather situations night and day in a very capable aircraft. Altiplano, I totally agree with you. I used to use the VNC quite a bit, but now have become very familiar with most BC airports south of YYD. Obviously any low level, visual maneouvering in mountainous area requires very good local knowledge. Without the local knowledge, you better have very good VFR conditions.

[Slider16]

Not sure about what you are getting at on your post oldtimer...

I fly regularly in BC and haven't put one into a mountain yet, nor come close nor do I intend to. If weather permits and contact/visual/canceling are feasible what's the problem? I don't think anyone here is talking about blowing altitudes while IMC or how to circumvent regulations, rather how to work safely and efficiently within the regulations.

I agree a having a VNC and using it are important.

As for your question... after a quick look this is what I'd say:

Ceilings in YQZ to be at least 800AGL or higher and at least 1SM if I were to have any expectation of getting in. Getting out would be another story the Spec Vis departure requires visual maneuvering to 1300AGL. If my ceiling was lower than 1300AGL but 800AGL or better, I would maneuver a visual circuit and conduct the missed off the RNAV approach for my climb.

In YXS I'd want 200' 1/2SM for the ILS 15...

Of course I'd also want to hold a legal alternate aswell.

Did I get it wrong? Makes sense to me. Sure I could go with worse weather and give it a shot but my expectations of getting in would be greatly reduced.

i agree, and i like the solution to the departure with weather below 1300AGL. Is this a legal departure? Could i expect to get away with it on a ride? Furthermore wouldn't you require 1 3/4 Vis for the approach ban into QZ on the RNAV approach?