EGE question

[o2bflyn]

Nope, its a landing restriction. Nothing to do with an IFR approach in this case. If it did have something to do with and IFR approach a FDC NOTAM could be issued and increase minimums or restrict circling for Cat C or greater.

What I am seeking is facts not speculation on how to land a Cat C aircraft legally, like some have be doing Legally or possibly Illegally, at EGE while the NOTAM is in effect.

thanks.

Maybe that hill I am talking about lays in the glideslope to the taxiway. That would effect landing requirements, I think.

Becareful about discounting speculation. Sometimes Speculation, or brainstorming, can yield some truths. That sounds a bit jerky....sorry, did not mean it as such.

If you want facts, you are looking in the wrong place in a forum. Call Eagle tower. Go right to the source. They are good people. Have operated out of there for the past 8 years, they have always been helpful.

 

[Fly91]

If you want facts, you are looking in the wrong place in a forum. Call Eagle tower. Go right to the source. They are good people. Have operated out of there for the past 8 years, they have always been helpful.

True. I spoke to them yesterday. Tower supervisor informed me on the NOTAM. I first spoke to one of the tower controllers and none of them in their had a clue why that NOTAM was in place. They said they don't issue NOTAMS. I also asked them why Lears have been going there, he said they have no authority who lands there and really don't control it. He gave me the phone number to talk to the supervisor. I don't have the tower number, its not listed and the FBO's would not give it to me, but they are allowed to transfer you to the tower.

post #26, page 2

 

[LJ45]

I asked a DE friend of mine what he thinks. He 100% agrees with the tower supervisor I spoke with. Runway width and nothing else dictates approach CAT's.

So, I can never land a Cat C airplane on a 75' wide runway? It's 75' wide!

 

[Fly91]

So, I can never land a Cat C airplane on a 75' wide runway? It's 75' wide!

Remember, this is what I was told by the tower sup.

I'm now taking the next step and talking to the FSDO, its the only way to get to the bottom of it.

Later, I'm gonna check out of bunch of random aproach plates, that should settle it.

The runway width issue may be true, but maybe there's other circumstances that allow CAT "C" aircraft into certain 75 foot runways.

I think its runway width but I'm thinking that terrain is a logical factor as well. Those two factors are what cause an aircraft to manuever in a way where it could adversely affect how that aircraft makes the runway in a safe manner.

 

[o2bflyn]

True. I spoke to them yesterday. Tower supervisor informed me on the NOTAM. I first spoke to one of the tower controllers and none of them in their had a clue why that NOTAM was in place. They said they don't issue NOTAMS. I also asked them why Lears have been going there, he said they have no authority who lands there and really don't control it. He gave me the phone number to talk to the supervisor. I don't have the tower number, its not listed and the FBO's would not give it to me, but they are allowed to transfer you to the tower.

post #26, page 2

Sorry, I remember reading that now.....

I might have the tower number somewhere.....let me see if I can find it.

 

[avbug]

Guesswork, guesswork, guesswork.

One more time for the dense and deaf: it has nothing to do with IFR/VFR. It's not a TERPs issue. The NOTAM specifically identified an airport design criteria, as previously identified, with references provided. You can view the advisory circular yourself which outlines it, and it's got all the information you need.

The Airport Classification with respect to design criteria specifies to properties of the aircraft intended to use the field. The classification represents the largest aircraft with respect to speed (A, B, C, etc), and wingspan (I, II, III, etc) expected to use that airfield, and the airfield is designed to meet the needs of those aircraft.

In the case of the NOTAM, a restriction is placed on the aircraft that can use the field, referencing the Airport Reference Code...which is detailed in the AC previously cited.

What you don't have is an approach or terminal procedure restriction. What you don't have is a VFR restriction. What you don't have is an IFR restriction. Going to other approach plates to come up with an answer to your guesswork will net you exactly squat...because the approach plates and instrument flight rules in general have nothing to do with the restriction at Eagle. It's an Airport Reference Code.

Again, the speed of the aircraft does correspond to approach speeds used in defining instrument approaches, but only coincidentally...because it's two different subjects. Airport Classification Code regards designing airport, and IFR approach categories regard flying procedures. The NOTAM is not referencing an IFR approach category, but an airport design criteria.

 

[Fly91]

Sorry, I remember reading that now.....

I might have the tower number somewhere.....let me see if I can find it.

Don't need the tower number anymore, but any FBO on the field will transfer you there.

They had no idea why the NOTAM was in place.

 

[LJ45]

Again, the speed of the aircraft does correspond to approach speeds used in defining instrument approaches, but only coincidentally...because it's two different subjects. Airport Classification Code regards designing airport, and IFR approach categories regard flying procedures. The NOTAM is not referencing an IFR approach category, but an airport design criteria.

The speed used to decide the Cat in this case is still at max certified landing weight and not actual landing weight, correct just like the Approach Cat.?

 

[avbug]

LJ45, I can't answer that without referencing the AC. I don't think the AC is as performance-specific as the regulation or the terminal procedures, as each aircraft is pre-selected for an approach category. When flying an approach, one may fall into more than one category (circling at a higher speed, for example). The Airport Reference Code, instead, is a general guideline which of itself isn't restrictive (just in case of the NOTAM).

 

[Fly91]

LJ45,

Just got a call back from an inspector. He said all I have to do is put the request in writing and mail it in to the FSDO. I guess I'll do it, but who knows how long it'll take to get it back. At least I can drive over to pick it up if he approves it before Wednesday next week when we leave for Vegas. We might stop in EGE on the way back on Sat.

PM me if you want the inspectors name, FSDO number and FSDO address, if you want one too. Its always good to work with the same inspector, because you know how some do things and some won't.