How many IAPs in the UK are there which can be flown without ATC or AFIS present
Sadly none, actually untill recently it was not possible to fly CAA IAP without ATC, AFIS GPS IAP are restricted to 6 per day, others are restricted to CAT operators…however, people have learned to live on DYI IAP without CAA IAP, especially thanks to GPS but for “training” you are limited to official IAP
You could argue that IAP without ATC/AFIS being subject to MVL is a very genius solution and it’s not bad after all to sort mess of IFR/VFR priority in uncontrolled aerdromes on sunny days without ATS but I won’t stretch that logic when weather is bad…
people have learned to live without CAA IAP, especially thanks to GPS but for “training” you are limited to official IAP
What does that mean?
I never done a DYI IAP with an IRE sitting nearby for IR/IMCR revalidation, you have to book a CAA IAP with ATC…
I hear what you are saying Ibra. But when I dly home ar night with a ceiling of around 1000’ I al happy to cloud break on the ILS at LFBH or the RNP at LFRI (both tend to have very different weather patterns except for wind direction) and if no- one is around switch on the lights and do a circle to land either at somewhere between 850 ft and 900ft I don’t have the exact figures to hand. It saves flying to a lanned alternate like Nantes or Limoges and somehow makinc my way home from there.
It’s better than nothing but it should not be a curse neither?
1/ risks of circling (or homemade) approach at home base are nowhere compared to those when going to unfamiliar places, especially for GPS runways with no lights unless one is based in a valley with 10kft MSA above
2/ TAF planning at destination is done on raw minima (alternate you raise but you don’t match circling) but actual flying will be on higher actual minima (you could say it’s like real weather), if you decide to assume ATC/AFIS are always not around or decide to raise minima during planning to visual circuit height, you may end up with a higher dispatch rate with scud run on PPL than IFR with an IR
3/ when flying with marginal cloudbase and no traffic is around with wind on PFD, it’s worth asking what problem one is trying to solve?
4/ in some places IFR IAP & VFR VAC don’t mix well, one is left hand while other is right hand, say Grenoble & LeTouquet
5/ you may bust every noise sensitive area by flying tight IFR circling then VFR circuit, say at Toussus & LeTouquet
There has been a change in AD rules law text (now reflected in ENR wording but not yet in GEN wording), it used to allow one to skip if weather is low than circuit with AD info from other aircraft…
Circle to land is not a home made procedure and should not be confused with one.
It has been designed by a professional person/body whose job it is to build in protection.
A home made approach can be anything you decide to draw up. How much protection it gives you is down to how good you are at it. Basically the same applies to building your own aircraft but at least when you build your own aircraft you usually have to have some person with some proven expertise come and check your work. With a homemade approach you only know whether or not you have got it right when you fly it. And as Cobalt wrote the first law is don’t crash.
gallois wrote:
With a homemade approach you only know whether or not you have got it right when you fly it.
But of course you flight test it in VMC before using it in anger…
gallois wrote:
Circle to land is not a home made procedure and should not be confused with one.It has been designed by a professional person/body whose job it is to build in protection.
I agree 50% but you are wrong 50%, at least on two examples I provided, by design you are not protected in the VFR circuit only during the IFR circling
- If IFR IAP says “circling only south, prohibited north due to obstacles”, it means you stick to that side and forget VFR downwind & base leg
- If VFR VAC says “circuit only north, prohibited south due to noise”, it means you are not bothering neighbors (it has no obstacles protection)
I suggest you try it at LeTouquet or Grenoble at CTL MDA? I have done some freestyle, homemade and low level flying…I can recognize one when I see it
Airborne_Again wrote:
But of course you flight test it in VMC before using it in anger…
Between us an “amateur DIY IAP” is only usable in similar conditions that would allow legal VFR scud run & freestyle landing in VMC conditions (1.5km visibility & clear of clouds but let’s add a bit on ceiling and say 500ft agl cloud-base for cruise & 200ft above obstacles in circuit), the latter has no obstacle clearances in cruise and they are avoided using the eye (and F16 afterburners into clouds), the former is safe all the way until say 500ft/300ft MDH/MOC, it’s the simple choice between 30s near the ground where you know exactly where you are and 1h near the ground all over the place
If the runway is 3km long with no obstacles obstacles, you can DIY IAP or make freestyle circling as you wish but this is not the case in most GA airports, sticking to stable straigh-in final is way more healthy
Anyone who has flow PAR/SRA approach to military runways, can fly IAP on compass, cross threshold at IFR MSA and still land before the end of the runway, GA runways comes with more risks, the runways are short for any freestyle circling
Circle to land is a defined procedure under IFR and is nothing to do with a DIY IAP which is normally a straight-in landing. Don’t mix these up.
Peter wrote:
DIY IAP which is normally a straight-in landing
Yes I agree, DIY IAP is typically IFR straigh-in with proper obstacle protections (no low flying or freestyle circling/circuit s**t-show)
