Straight-in approach inside the IF

[Wburns]

I'm a little puzzled, is a straight-in approach from a FIX inside the IF but before the FAF legal? I wanna say no but, Thompson for instance; straight-in ILS/Dme Rwy 06 from the final approach course fix 'FALKE'. I know pilots are flying it but, is it legal?

From the 'Instrument Procedures Manual pg. 4-40' (circa 1997), "the pilot may begin a straight-in approach from any transition inside the designated IF provided that ATC is aware of the pilot's intentions and subsequent maneuvering is within the capabilities of the aircraft"

If your cleared direct FALKE for the straight in ILS/DME RWY 06 in Thompson have they just allowed you to use FALKE as your transition while its located INSIDE the IF?

Your opinions and comments welcome.

[AuxBatOn]

I think the regs are pretty clear....

From your own quote:

From the 'Instrument Procedures Manual pg. 4-40' (circa 1997), "the pilot may begin a straight-in approach from any transition inside the designated IF provided that ATC is aware of the pilot's intentions and subsequent maneuvering is within the capabilities of the aircraft"

[wilton]

if you are cleared for a contact approach you can join at 1.5 nm while doing cartwheels if you like.

[willing to fly]

I can't quote chapter and verse but I believe you can self navigate to any fix if you are so equipped and at a safe altitude (ie 25NM safe altitude). Still looking for a reference in the AIM though.

[200Above]

yes i've been wondering this also. from the comments and the interp. of the regs, it looks like you can.

makes sense though...

[Doc]

Unless you are cleared for a specific procedure, like....ABC is cleared to intercourse the local sector, call going down on the Mary...." Then, you have to intercourse as cleared, and go down on the Mary. Hope this clears it up for you.

[Hawkeye4077]

What about un-controlled airspace?


Hawk

[200Above]

At an uncontrolled airport, I'd say it would be the same as controlled execpt for that part that you have to advise ATC.

If the IF is located straight in, I'm sure there's pilots that proceeed direct to the IF and turn inbound to intercept course and complete the approach that way. I dont see anything 'unsafe' about it, assuming your at your safe altitudes. Yes, I know, theres different approachs where terrain may be a problem but you know what I mean.

[AuxBatOn]

At an uncontrolled airport, I'd say it would be the same as controlled execpt for that part that you have to advise ATC.

If the IF is located straight in, I'm sure there's pilots that proceeed direct to the IF and turn inbound to intercept course and complete the approach that way. I dont see anything 'unsafe' about it, assuming your at your safe altitudes. Yes, I know, theres different approachs where terrain may be a problem but you know what I mean.

That's why you always maintain a safe altitude (MSA, Safe 100 NM, step downs, MDA). That will keep you safe. If there is an IF, you can shoot the straight-in approach.

[PilotFlying]

Virtually all vectored straight-in approaches are intercepted inside the IF. It is definitely legal, provided you adhere to the appropriate safe altitudes - be it minimum vectoring altitude issued by ATC, PT altitude, MSA, etc.

Cheers,

[200Above]

Hmmmmm.... was just surfing some Youtube videos and came across this video that relates to this topic.

:45 is particularly interesting. Can you actually do this? When the screen scrolls up, notice that the radial @ 10 DME is not an actual fix, just one he "created".

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-jnUuu1Z ... re=related

Views?

[AuxBatOn]

Whatever the controller clears you to, you do whatever you want to get there.

[Raptor256]

I'm a little puzzled, is a straight-in approach from a FIX inside the IF but before the FAF legal? I wanna say no but, Thompson for instance; straight-in ILS/Dme Rwy 06 from the final approach course fix 'FALKE'. I know pilots are flying it but, is it legal?

Lets not forget there is a mechanism in the CAP that releases the pilot from a procedure turn. The No PT indication on the chart itself. For approaches the only thing that releases us from the requirement of a procedure turn is ATC giving us vectors-to-final, or a No PT on the approach. I am not taking Contact Approaches into consideration here since we seem to be talking specifically about IFR approach procedures where a contact approach is essentially a visual procedure even though it isn't used that way all the time. The ILS in Thompson has a No PT, so as long as you intercept between the IF and FAF, such as at FALKE, you're good to go.

But now look at Churchill's ILS. Similar situation with an IF, but no No PT. It seems to me that at Churchill you must do a procedure turn.

[55+]

I don't agree with those designs as referenced. Look at ILS/DME RW 34 CYYC, if DME is referenced as the method of establishing the FAF(which is required) then the associated FACF symbology(PLAN VIEW) should have that solid bar through it which designates an IF referencing the DME source. Then you have the note NO PT.

Most aircraft have RNAV capability but having said that, where is the intermediate segment because that is what an IF designates, a simple FACF doesn't do that. However GP interception is considered the final segment so if your aircraft was RNAV capable and you can fly to that published FACF then to GP interception, is that safe - yes it is and are you protected aka ROC, yes you are.

Non-precision portion though(GP U/S) and LOC only is another story................

[Raybanman]

Hmmmmm.... was just surfing some Youtube videos and came across this video that relates to this topic.

:45 is particularly interesting. Can you actually do this? When the screen scrolls up, notice that the radial @ 10 DME is not an actual fix, just one he "created".

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-jnUuu1Z ... re=related

Views?

Uncontilled, sure as long as you are using an approved RNAV system. GNS 430/530 would qualify. You can use it to align yourself with the inbound course at a safe altitude (P/T alt, 25m MSA etc), and then navigate from that point with traditional navaids backed up with the gps.

If controlled, the. You can ask for a vectorto whereveryou want, and he'll either give it to you or not.

[willing to fly]

I have been doing some more reading on this.

The latest version of the AIM still says that you must do a PT unless there is a published IF and the words NO PT. RAC 9.16 (Paragraph 1)
Paragraph 4: You can also intersect the final approach track inside the IF as long as ATC is aware and the aircraft is equipped or broadcast your intentions in uncontrolled airspace.

Seems fairly clear cut. Must have published IF and NO PT.
Have a look at Grande Prairie. All of the approaches have a fix on the approach track however it is not officially designated as an IF. It does have NO PT and an appropriate altitude listed. Take the VOR/DME 25 approach as an example. In practical terms, I would read this as I'm good to 4700' until OTPOX, then straight in to DUNIT at 3600 without doing a procedure turn.

The opposite example works for Churchill. The ILS/DME has an IF published (VIRKO) but does not say the words NO PT. Again in practical terms, any time I've gone in there, we just get cleared direct ADICT and straight in approach.

By the letter of the law, both of these examples are illegal. Right?

[fish4life]

I can't quote chapter and verse but I believe you can self navigate to any fix if you are so equipped and at a safe altitude (ie 25NM safe altitude). Still looking for a reference in the AIM though.

The requirements of the self navigation are different in this case, since FALKE is a none bold waypoint it is a Fly - by Waypoint therefore it is different from joining an approach with a GPS by using a bold waypoint or a Fly - OVER Waypoint. From what I understand the regulations require someone with a fully automated FMS with proper turn and awareness navigation (eg autopilot coupled FMS that will lead the turn and have you end up on the approach with proper decent) to be able to join the approach. If you have just a GPS with turn leading you need a bold or Fly - over Waypoint to join the approach. The only way around this is if you are joining the approach from within 30 degrees of the inbound course in which case standard GPS will work.

so anyone doing this approach and joining at FALKE other than Calm Air is doing it illegally I believe. (of course like someone said if the weather is alright you can request contact but were assuming its down to mins at this point.)

[PunkStarStudios]

Gatta chime in here.
I fly into Sarnia Ontario a fair amount (no tower).
Many times Toronto Centre will clear me to Govad (which I don't think is even part of the ILS approach - something off with that fix seems to me) and then when I am a few miles back I'll be asked "Can you navigate yourself onto the ILS or do you need a vector?" ... which 99% of the time I'll just get myself on there.

I also love flying negative rnav but get a "direct vector" from Massena to Fredericton.

Books and real life.... don't always reconcile

[AuxBatOn]

Books and real life.... don't always reconcile

Until something happens and you get the book thrown at you. Always cover your ass.