Should PPL training include NOT flying through instrument approaches in Class E-G?

I’m inclined to agree with Noe. Class E-G is “see and avoid” and if both aircraft are squittering ADS-B (there being no viable excuse not to) that should work without either pilot having to peer through that transparent plastic thing above our TV screens.

Anyway, in a few years time, when every farm strip may have an LPV (or whatever they will be called by then), they will be all but impossible to avoid.

I meant VMC. In IMC, this is no longer the domain of a PPL who knows nothing about IAPs (IMCR rated pilots will do – and I hope would take into account that. Also likely that they are under some sort of service, don’t know that there are that many aircraft non radio in IMC)

So, for Lydd, would you tell everyone not to fly at the platform altitude (there might even be several), in a shape of 28 miles wide? That would be close to Heathrow zone.

I think it’s a non issue. In VMC, you have as much see and avoid responsibility as them, and the fact that there is an IAP is not “blue lights and a siren” that gives priority over other traffic. You can deviate from your approach as easily a she can from his route.

imagine petitions against IAPs because having them disrupts the other traffic!

Noe an iap may be used as a let down. So you are in imc at the platform with vmc below. Clearly as you break out you dont want another aircraft to be flying through the approach in vmc. I think everyone should avoid and know to avoid flying through an approach, and outside class d atc should do their best to inform when they have traffic on the iap.

Instrument approaches in Class G should be banned full stop in my opinion.

The airspace should be made at least Class E and/or D where need be.

An aerodrome with no CAS and an instrument feather implies to me that traffic levels are so low that the aerodrome doesn’t need to (over-)protect/separate its traffic from anything else.

Then would you ban IFR in G too?

Seems perfectly reasonable to fly an approach in G. In IMC, it’s likely you are in radio contact (+ transponding) and others in IMC too. In VMC, you do like any other flying in uncontrolled airspace, you keep your eyes well open, and deviate from your approach if necessary.

I personally would hope that we get to a point where every runway at every airfield has an IAP, and in that situation, asking other traffic to avoid going through in VMC would be completely unmanageable. How would you implement that in the case of Lydd, for instance?

Then would you ban IFR in G too?

In certain busier areas yes.

In such areas flying IFR without mandatory receipt of some form of ATS is a bit silly.

Well, ATC is already provided in Class G in some weird parts of the world.

That said airspace change consultations and changes to procedures will cost though.

Depends if the aerodrome’s users wants to pay for it….

James_Chan wrote:

Instrument approaches in Class G should be banned full stop in my opinion.

Hahahahaha, please someone stop this nonsense. I’ll bite: why? Because there is no IMC in class G?

Noe wrote:

Playing a bit devils of devils advocate here, but Why should they have to move because someone wants (as opposed to needs – we are talking VFR here) to do a long approach?

Valid question. Also: what radio calls were made, Peter ? How could the other aircraft have been aware of yourself on the approach.

Peter wrote:

Should PPL training include NOT flying through instrument approaches in Class E-G?.

It should definitely include Situational Awareness! Knowing where to expect traffic is a big one there.

This doesn’t just apply to instrument approaches, but to straight-in approaches in general. Commercially they make a lot of sense, as they are very efficient for certain inbound tracks.