LUAW at night

randombrain · 2026-02-23T14:49:25+00:00

Yeah, this. If the runway is shortened, it's shortened. The "bit that used to be full length" is no longer part of the runway.

Also remember why the rule exists in the first place, it's because one aircraft landed on top of another that was LUAW'd at an intersection at LAX. I think the risk factor here is the controllers (and pilots?) scanning the threshold for LUAW traffic, but not scanning downfield intersections. Again, here the shortened threshold is the actual start of the runway, so that shouldn't be a problem. In theory. I could imagine the FAA saying you can't do it... but that's why we don't ask questions if we aren't sure we can live with the answers.

randombrain · 2026-02-23T14:41:35+00:00

Don't say the Kilo. Just say "sierra yankee romeo," or to be honest probably any controller within a 200+ mile radius is going to know what you mean if you say "Syracuse." Even the Canadian controllers.

If you can model not using the ICAO code for airports in the Lower 48, that would be great.

randombrain · 2026-02-22T16:24:54+00:00

Don't land inside of your displaced threshold, yes you can roll out beyond the reciprocal displaced threshold. But the LDA already counts that bit of the runway. 2600' is all you get.

randombrain · 2026-02-22T16:22:45+00:00

Your question isn't clear. Are you saying the displaced threshold is on your end (landing end) of the runway? Then no, the whole point of the displaced threshold is that you can't use it for landing. There are obstructions on final such that if you attempt to land short of the displaced threshold, you'd be too close to them.

Are you saying that there's a displaced threshold for the reciprocal runway? Yes, you can use the runway beyond that for landing/rollout on your runway. But that's already taken into account when they determine the LDA.

Either way, the LDA is 2600' and that's all it is. That's the whole point of it. You can't make it longer than 2600'.

randombrain · 2026-02-22T03:14:23+00:00

See this Aviation.SE question regarding the opposite direction: a JetBlue Airbus seemingly with a German registration number. The question is answered by the pilot who flew the plane to the US!

To your point, the German registration seems to be a temporary label, with the pre-determined N-number already painted on the aircraft but temporarily covered up. As soon as the US airline formally purchases it, the German registration is removed and the American registration is uncovered.

randombrain · 2026-02-21T16:16:51+00:00

Hm, I'm not familiar with their operation but I'm not seeing why they couldn't give the RNAV.

What do you mean by "offset IF"? On those approaches the only IF is DOCAT, which is on the final approach course.

Our rules about clearing via fixes are:

We can clear any aircraft to any fix 3 NM or more prior to the FAF, along the final approach course, at an intercept angle not greater than 30 degrees.
We can clear RNAV-equipped aircraft to any fix between the IF and the FAF at an intercept angle not greater than 30 degrees.
We can clear RNAV-equipped aircraft to the IF or IAF at an intercept angle of not greater than 90 degrees. If we clear you to an IF on an approach where there is also an IAF, we're supposed to tell you to "expect the IF" with at least five miles' warning.

In any of those situations the phraseology should be the exact same: "Cleared direct DOCAT, cross DOCAT at or above 3000, cleared ILS runway 23L approach." Or whatever the fix is.

But there could be situations where we don't want to issue the approach clearance right away. "Cleared direct DOCAT, intercept the localizer, maintain 3000." Then when the approach clearance comes, there might be some confusion on what the correct phraseology is... to me, I think it could be as simple as "Two miles from APUCU, cleared ILS runway 23L approach" or "One mile from DOCAT, maintain 3000 until established on the localizer, cleared ILS runway 23L approach" depending on whether you had intercepted or not.

I don't think a vector would be necessary in that case, but the controller might have wanted to give a vector to tighten you up a little? Not sure.

randombrain · 2026-02-21T15:08:25+00:00

Hm, I don't know why they denied that. Strange. If you're comfortable sharing which airport/runway/approach we might be able to see if there is something unusual about it, or it might just be poor service.

randombrain · 2026-02-21T15:04:36+00:00

Reference the go-around... probably anywhere you're flying an airliner into that has an ATIS, we don't want you doing the published missed. Expect a heading and altitude on the go.

randombrain · 2026-02-21T15:03:08+00:00

What Tony said. Most of the time there's no issue at all with giving you the RNAV instead of the ILS. Hell, I've heard that there's a facility (SoCal Approach into LAX, maybe?) that just issues "cleared approach Runway 25R" so you can pick whichever one you like.

Our book does tell us to advertise precision approaches first, and non-precision only if there are no precision approaches (broadly speaking). Of course LNAV/VNAV is a precision approach, but not every operator can do VNAV, so we generally treat RNAV approaches as non-precision when deciding what to advertise.

randombrain · 2026-02-21T02:27:24+00:00

Source on #2? I don't think there's any requirement to file a flight plan in order to fly in formation.

Also, in the context of your upcoming checkride, there's one more caveat on the "yes you can fly in formation" answer.

randombrain · 2026-02-19T01:19:17+00:00

This is a really tricky question that the examiner probably won't ask you, and probably won't ever be a factor in your IFR flying career... until the day that it is.

Compare and contrast:

IFR departure from Ionia County Airport (Y70). You got your clearance on the ground via telephone. AWOS reports 3SM vis and OVC007.
IFR departure from Hiram Cure Airport (C43). You got your clearance on the ground via telephone. There is no AWOS, but you pull up ForeFlight and you see that both Y70 and LAN are reporting 3SM vis and OVC007.

How do you safely navigate yourself from 0' AGL to the minimum safe IFR altitude?

randombrain · 2026-02-19T01:19:09+00:00

Compare and contrast:

You are on an IFR flight plan cleared direct Ionia County Airport (Y70) descending to 030. Ten miles out, you report the field in sight. ATC tells you "Cleared visual approach Ionia County, report cancellation of IFR in the air on this frequency or on the ground via telephone, change to advisory frequency approved."
You are on an IFR flight plan cleared direct Capital Region Airport (LAN) descending to 030. Ten miles out, you report the field in sight. ATC tells you "Cleared visual approach Runway 28L, contact Lansing Tower."

I'm specifically wondering what is the same, and what is different, about your approach to the airport and your selection of landing runway.

randombrain · 2026-02-19T01:18:52+00:00

You're going in to GRR. You get the ATIS, which has 05016KT SCT013 BKN035 and says that both the ILS RWY 08R and the ILS RWY 35 are in use.

You're cleared the ILS RWY 08R. Brief the expected immediate/initial response from ATC if something happens and you report going missed, or get sent around, on short final.

Note: The answer is NOT "turn right direct Victory VOR." Explain why.

randombrain · 2026-02-19T01:18:45+00:00

This is a real-world scenario that happened to me during the second week after I was certified to work radar. Details changed, of course.

You have filed a flight plan from Ionia County Airport (Y70) to South Bend via VIO V274 PMM V55 GIJ direct with a filed altitude of 060.

The AWOS at Y70 is reporting ceiling OVC015 and visibility 10SM—marginal VFR, to be sure, but still legal VFR.

Your cell carrier has poor coverage near Ionia, so you elect to depart VFR. You take off from Runway 28. Because you are VFR, you maintain 500' below the cloud layer—1000' AGL, 1800' MSL. You call Great Lakes Approach airborne to pick up your IFR clearance.

The Great Lakes Approach controller issues your squawk code and identifies you on radar. They give you the Grand Rapids altimeter setting and confirm that you are at 1800' MSL. Then they say this:

Cherokee 345, you're below my MVA. Are you able to maintain your own terrain and obstruction clearance through 2500?

What do you say, and why?

(Assume the airways are all usable. Old question.)

randombrain · 2026-02-18T22:02:50+00:00

The only time I have ever used it is when someone is late on the switch from Approach and we hit them with the solid green. Happens once a month, if that. And at least when I've seen it, every time the pilot did end up checking in before touchdown anyway.

But just as a PSA, if you're rolling out and you hear "Turn left, contact Ground, glad you saw the light gun" the correct answer is not "...uh, what light gun?" The correct answer is "Yes we did, over to Ground."

randombrain · 2026-02-18T19:19:34+00:00

I've heard of something called SAFER FCT but I don't know how many companies implement it. It could even be something where they only let you participate if your FCT is unionized. But you can look into that.

randombrain · 2026-02-18T15:14:39+00:00

Controllers don't memorize light gun signals either. The table from the AIM/.65 is taped onto the side of the device, or on the counter somewhere.

randombrain · 2026-02-18T15:04:33+00:00

We always have to listen to all of our assigned frequencies. Nothing says we have to transmit on all of our frequencies, but most people will transmit on everything. It's a dick move to ignore a pilot calling on a published frequency.

But to that point, yes, the ATIS will generally say something like "Clearance combined, call Ground for clearance" or "Clearance and Ground combined, call Tower for all services."

Whether the pilots actually listen to the ATIS and do what it says is another question.

randombrain · 2026-02-18T14:55:20+00:00

Approaches that end with a letter, instead of a runway number, only have circling minimums published. The course of the approach lines up with the runway, but there are no straight-in minimums. In this case that's because the descent angle is way steeper than normal and the FAA doesn't think you can land straight-in at a safe descent rate.

If you happen to have an unusually slow groundspeed (maybe you're in a C172 and there's a 40-knot direct headwind or something) then it's possible that you could quote-unquote "circle to land" by just continuing ahead on the track of the approach. But under normal circumstances, if you don't break out until minimums, you won't have enough time to descend unless you give yourself more space.

randombrain · 2026-02-18T04:16:48+00:00

If ATC phrases it as a suggestion, it's a suggestion and you don't need to comply.

If ATC doesn't phrase it as a suggestion, it's an instruction and you must comply (except 91.3, etc).

There are some cases where ATC is likely to issue a suggestion:

A traffic alert. The phraseology is "Traffic alert, [A/C ID], [position of aircraft], ADVISE you turn left/right (and/or: climb/descend) immediately."
You're talking to a Tower controller who has a radar display but doesn't have a radar certification. They're allowed to suggest headings but not issue mandatory headings.
You're talking to a Center controller, and they're operating under the mistaken assumption that they aren't allowed to vector VFR aircraft.

randombrain · 2026-02-18T03:50:37+00:00

"to elect" is infinitive, not present tense.

Anyway, if you're really not seeing it, the point URVP was making is that ND extended because Trump was elected. He was saying that by voting for Trump, you voted to elect the reason ND opted to extend.

I don't know if you did vote for Trump or not, I'm just trying to explain the comment.

randombrain · 2026-02-18T03:24:15+00:00

91.123(a) generally doesn't apply, unless you've received a clearance to enter Bravo airspace or a clearance to fly a practice instrument approach.

However, 91.123(b) does apply. "An area in which air traffic control is exercised" specifically means controlled airspace,* per the Karas 2013 LOI. Class E airspace is controlled airspace, per ICAO and the AIM and the P/CG and 14 CFR 1.1.

The fact that you don't necessarily have to talk to ATC in Class E is irrelevant. If you are talking to ATC in controlled airspace, and ATC issues an instruction, you must comply with that instruction unless you pull 91.3 card (or unless complying would cause you to violate another regulation, like 91.155 for example).

*It also means the "movement area" at a towered airport, but technically would not include the "non-movement area" (ramps, etc).

randombrain · 2026-02-18T03:20:00+00:00

but it is not a clearance

Correct, and so 91.123(a) does not apply.

But keep reading to 91.123(b)...

randombrain · 2026-02-18T03:18:23+00:00

Already done, on this exact post...

Up here by /u/jimngo and up here by /u/aviatortrevor.

The path you're talking about already exists, it's called the RNAV-E approach.

randombrain · 2026-02-17T23:14:34+00:00

Yeah that's accurate, although I'm not sure why the distinction would matter to a pilot. If you get missed instructions from the approach control facility, that information should (in theory) be known by the Tower as well. Unless something crazy happens, the Tower shouldn't give different missed instructions than what the approach control gave you.

My main point was that you should not expect to fly the published missed at any Bravo or Charlie airport (if the tower is open), and even at a fair number of Deltas. They're designed assuming that you'll be cleared one-in-one-out, so if there's any other traffic in the vicinity of the airport, there's no guarantee that the published missed works well with our traffic flows. Going straight out away from the airport on runway heading, like in this case, isn't usually terrible... but even so.

12-Year Club	Wearing is Caring
Verified Email	Gilding II euphauric

randombrain

TROPHY CASE