-1

Text

Here is instrument VOR-A approach at Eagle Lake. If I am coming from the north, it looks to me a big waste to make a procedure turn. On the other hand there is nobody there to approve straight-in approach like in controlled airspace. Any good explanation why I should or should not to make this PT?

Pondlife
  • 71,714
  • 21
  • 214
  • 410
Roman Mandeleil
  • 99
  • 1

1 Answers1

4

The question is flawed because it presumes that you are flying a published instrument approach procedure in uncontrolled airspace without an IFR clearance.

Looking at the VFR sectional you can see that there is a shaded magenta border around this airport that signifies Class E airspace, (controlled airspace) with a floor of 700' above the surface. You cannot fly in controlled airspace, in IMC, without an IFR clearance. And the published procedure contains a couple hard altitudes well above the 700' floor.

Eagle Lake airport

The reason for this is to control and protect instrument traffic going into and out of uncontrolled airports during instrument meteorological conditions. In order to get into the Class G airspace from the surface to 700' above the field during IMC, you need to first transition through the overlying Class E. The published altitudes for the procedure turn are in controlled airspace, and the square "keyhole" extension to the North would seem to exist for the very purpose of containing this procedure turn.

So in short, you fly what you are cleared for. If cleared for the straight in approach you would not have to execute the procedure turn. The presence or operation of a control tower at the field is not pertinent to the question - tower doesn’t clear you to fly an instrument procedure, the approach controller does.

Worth noting, if cleared for a straight in RW 17 approach with weather at minimums, you would only be in Class G, (uncontrolled) in IMC for about 200' or roughly 20 seconds descending before you would either break out and continue in VMC, or go missed. Not a lot of exposure, or freedom for creative deviation...

Michael Hall
  • 25,964
  • 2
  • 62
  • 99
  • Thanks for the details . . . not having done too much of this, my quandary would be how to transition from the 2,100ft MSA to 1,400 FAF altitude at the VOR? – skipper44 Dec 27 '20 at 21:11
  • If you are coming from the North and request the straight in, ATC would probably clear you down to 1400’. And if they didn’t, just ask for it. – Michael Hall Dec 27 '20 at 21:23
  • If ATC is able to clear me, I have no issues. I meant otherwise . . in IMC no surveillance radar avlbl that day? – skipper44 Dec 27 '20 at 22:27
  • I do know that sometimes the FAF may be approached at a nominal 3deg vertical flight path reaching 1400ft at theFAF. – skipper44 Dec 27 '20 at 22:32
  • @skipper44, I am not familiar with ATC’s minimum equipment requirements for providing IFR separation, but if they are unable to clear you then you are unable to fly it. – Michael Hall Dec 27 '20 at 22:42
  • 4
    @skipper44, you would not transition from the MSA. The MSA is for emergency reference only. You would get an altitude assignment from ATC. ATC probably doesn't have radar service there and that low, but radar is not the only way ATC keeps track of aircraft. On approaches like this, only one aircraft will be cleared for the approach at a time, and they will not clear another aircraft in or out of that airport until you've called in that you're on the ground or missed the approach. – Dave-CFII Dec 28 '20 at 16:36
  • @MichaelHall -- re comment "as I establish in my answer below, the approach is in controlled airspace. " and answer "it presumes that you are flying a published instrument approach procedure in uncontrolled airspace without an IFR clearance." -- is your assertion that the entire published instrument approach procedure is in controlled airspace? Wouldn't the published "approach" also be considered to encompass the distance beyond the final approach fix, on to wherever the aircraft breaks out IMC? I'm just asking because while you are undoubtedly right that the pilot is not free to invent – quiet flyer Jan 04 '21 at 13:19
  • @MichaelHall -- (ctd) not free to invent his own approach in controlled airspace, the answer seems to imply that there no such thing as legally flying on an instrument approach in IMC in uncontrolled airspace. Which I don't see how can be justified. It seems to me that many published approaches are partly in uncontrolled airspace. Maybe it is just a matter of terminology but I don't see how the term "approach" would only apply to the portion in controlled airspace. – quiet flyer Jan 04 '21 at 13:24
  • @quiet flyer, I thought I made it clear that only 200 vertical feet on the straight in was in G, but I am open to any suggestions to clarify this... – Michael Hall Jan 04 '21 at 17:24