Here's another - feeder route altitudes?

[mmmdonut]

The answer, dickhead is that they will assign an altitude prior to giving you a clearance.

How many times in that CRJ of yours have you been cleared to fly an approach like you described? Maybe on your flightsim CRJ you fvckin wannabe. Do your homework before mom catches you pretending to be a pilot!

 

[Uncle Sparky]

Why is an RJ pilot asking such a basic question? Must work for Mesa.....

I used to fly with a United 777 Captain at the last company I worked for. He started his career flying Lears and liked to do contract work on occasion for some extra cash, to stay fresh and to do some "real" flying. On longer legs, he would get out Jepp#1 and study the introduction section(symbology/legend) and look for items that he didn't know already. ...................only a FOOL thinks he's learned everything!

 

[Swerpipe]

The only stupid question is the one never asked

RJFLYER,

It is amazing that people instead of giving an answer engage in personal attacks. Your scenario is very relevant when flying in places like Mexico, places without radar and ATC "intervention". When the feeder is depicted on the approach plate it is a "published route". Once cleared for the approach you can and should (unless you want to be "high") descend to the altitude depicted on that published route. The feeder route is a published route and will have an altitude depicted. It also happens when cleared for the approach via a DME arc and the arc has step downs based on radials. You would descend to the altitude despicted on those radials. In Mexico, many airports are surrounded by Volcanos and these stepdowns give you terrain clearance. There is nothing muddy about that. Once cleared for the approach you are allowed to descend. If you were going direct the IAF and you are not on a published feeeder route, you need to wait passing the IAF to start descending. Hope that clears it.
Also, remember, you must always fly the procedure turn unless SHARP
S-specified on the chart "No PT"
H-properly aligned holding procedure
A-out of a DME arc
R-Radar vectored to final
P-teardrop procedure turn
Your scenario probably is not common while flying in the USA but happens all the time we go to Mexico. It is also relevant in the USA if you were to have a "Loss of Comm" situation. Many pilots think loss of comm would never happen but remember ATC could have a wild fire, earthquake, power loss, computer crash, terrorist attack, etc... which would result in the same scenario.

What I'm trying to find out is if cleared at 2000' (as midlifeflyer stated) "proceed direct Beaumont VOR. Cleared for the Beaumont ILS Runway 12 approach," can you descend to the 1700' as published on the feeder?
No, that only applies to the feeder. If you were cleared direct to the VOR you can only start descending after passing BPT and outbound on the localizer.
The responses that some of the folks have given you, highlights how some pilots think they know everything and they don't. Furthermore, they are not even aware of the operational differences between flying in the US vs. somewhere else... Take care...

 

[midlifeflyer]

The question becomes, is the feeder considered a "published segment" of the approach?

It is.

In a TERPS sense, a feeder route is an approach procedure segment that is created when the IAF is not on an airway. It's not part of the enroute structure, but is an off-airway segment designed to get you from a point in the enroute structure to the IAF. The =only= place it's published is as a segment of an approach. It follows the same TERPS criteria for obstructions, etc as any other approach segment. (The primary TERPS paragraph is 220 although there is, as usual with TERPS, a lot of other information elsewhere in the volume)

It's probably not as clear as it might be, but it's covered in the part of AIM 5-4-6, "Approach Clearance" that says (no, I'm not yelling. The allcaps is the AIM's
==============================
a. An aircraft which has been cleared to a holding fix and subsequently "cleared . . . approach" has not received new routing. Even though clearance for the approach may have been issued prior to the aircraft reaching the holding fix, ATC would expect the pilot to proceed via the holding fix (his/her last assigned route), and the feeder route associated with that fix (if a feeder route is published on the approach chart) to the initial approach fix (IAF) to commence the approach. WHEN CLEARED FOR THE APPROACH, THE PUBLISHED OFF AIRWAY (FEEDER) ROUTES THAT LEAD FROM THE EN ROUTE STRUCTURE TO THE IAF ARE PART OF THE APPROACH CLEARANCE.
==============================

It really is pretty basic stuff, although understandably forgotten since, in practice, radar coverage has made the use of the procedure pretty uncommon. Lack of use can make even the simplest things open to question. Heck, if we didn't use it all the time, the answer to 1+1=? would probably be subject to the usual group of "different opinions on the subject."

 

[DAS at 10/250]

ps: forgot to answer this part - no, we don't have overnights in BPT, but who knows what the schedules from ATL in Feb will look like...

Or if it will even work out. I'm not sure you guys are going to be able to hold onto the revenue guarantee that was provided for the BPT-DFW route. But if ya'll do start RON here we have some good guys to kill a few brews with.

Your scenario is very relevant when flying in places like Mexico, places without radar and ATC "intervention".

And here in BPT. The BPT TRSA only operates from 0600-2200 LCL. Houston Center takes over after that and they are not even remotely interested in giving radar vectors. After the tower closes your approach clearance will be "Flight XXXX maintain 3000 till 'stablished on a segment of the approach, cleared approach at BPT, report cancelation this freq or down time with Montogomery Radio." So, when the flights start from ATL and you get here after hours, it looks like you will proceed direct the BPT VOR (winds allowing) and fly the published full procedure ILS.

If that does happen, remember that BPT Class D is Class E after hours, so don't cancel airborne without VFR on the field.

 

[RJFlyer]

swerpipe and midlifeflyer - thanks, that's what I suspected, but wasn't certain about.

DAS - if BPT RONs happen, I'll look you up.

mmmdonut - you're an idiot.

How many times in that CRJ of yours have you been cleared to fly an approach like you described?

Never, but it could happen and I didn't know the answer, so I asked. You are a waste of oxygen. I'm finished with you.

*adds mmmdonut to "Ignore" list*

 

[Uncle Sparky]

RJFLYER,

It is amazing that people instead of giving an answer engage in personal attacks..

I'm guessing that since that came right after my response, that you are considering me to by one of these "people". If that's the case, mine wasn't a "personal attack", it was an attempt to tactfully shut that Doofus up and maybe even get him to think(remote possibility that it may be!)about actually trying to learn something new. I'm sorry my answer wasn't up to your standards or within your acceptable guidelines!

 

[Swerpipe]

Not directed to you

I'm guessing that since that came right after my response, that you are considering me to by one of these "people". If that's the case, mine wasn't a "personal attack", it was an attempt to tactfully shut that Doofus up and maybe even get him to think(remote possibility that it may be!)about actually trying to learn something new. I'm sorry my answer wasn't up to your standards or within your acceptable guidelines!

Actually Uncle Sparky,

Quite the contrary, I liked your post. As pilots we will never come even close to knowing "enough". Discussions like this one should be encouraged not ridiculed. I think that if a pilot has a question, his peers could offer knowledge or assitance without the "you fly an RJ and you don't know that?" BS. My comments weren't directed at anyone in particular. Let's provide help or assitance or let someone else do it.

 

[mmmdonut]

mmmdonut - you're an idiot. Never, but it could happen and I didn't know the answer, so I asked. You are a waste of oxygen. I'm finished with you.

*adds mmmdonut to "Ignore" list*

WAAAAAAAAAA!!!! What a crybaby... go back to flight sim ya wannabe.

 

[DAS at 10/250]

As pilots we will never come even close to knowing "enough".

Oh yeah! I'm a Navajo pilot and I know everything! Everything between this row and that row. Between the Chickletts and the Gum. Everything between the Chickletts, the gum, and the watch , and the bear.

Sorry, that was a tragic attempt at the Steve Martin line from THE JERK.

But I do agree that this should be a forum for learning and professional development and not a pissing contest. Oh yeah, and we should also burn PFTer's at the stake!

 

[Swerpipe]

Segmented E Circle

If that does happen, remember that BPT Class D is Class E after hours, so don't cancel airborne without VFR on the field.

Personally know a pilot violated for "overlooking the segmented E line on the chart" and cancelling IFR to "help" center with 2 mile vis on the ground. Great point. BTW love your AVTAR, I think I met her in College.

 

[philo beddoe]

Midlifer-

I agree with your reference from the AIM, but I have two 'second thoughts' about it though.

1. The AIM indicates that it is part of the approach clearance, but does that by extension automatically mean that it part of the approach, as in "maintain 3000 until established on the approach".

2. I could see this being one of those deals where you could ask ten different controllers or feds and get ten different answers.


That being said, I think the following logic applies.

If you flying feeder route you are very likely non-radar.
It follows that it is very unlikely that there is going to be another aircraft anywhere near you. If you are all alone in the area, it makes no difference if you descend to the feeder altitude or not, since you know you have obstacle protection,, and the only other reason to wait would be traffic separation.
(With this one caution: if ATC left you hanging a few thousand feet higher as you hit the feeder route, it might be wise to find out why.)

 

[Uncle Sparky]

Oh yeah! I'm a Navajo pilot and I know everything! Everything between this row and that row. Between the Chickletts and the Gum. Everything between the Chickletts, the gum, and the watch , and the bear.

Sorry, that was a tragic attempt at the Steve Martin line from THE JERK.

!

I remember when I found my "special purpouse".

Actually Uncle Sparky,

Quite the contrary, I liked your post. As pilots we will never come even close to knowing "enough". Discussions like this one should be encouraged not ridiculed. I think that if a pilot has a question, his peers could offer knowledge or assitance without the "you fly an RJ and you don't know that?" BS. My comments weren't directed at anyone in particular. Let's provide help or assitance or let someone else do it.Yesterday 18:27

I sort of assumed that might be the case. Pride and misinterpretation of intent in translation through the typed word got the best of me?! Sorry.........

WAAAAAAAAAA!!!! What a crybaby... go back to flight sim ya wannabe.

I'm embarassed that I defended your right to speak freely in a past thread! I'm would venture to guess that even your own homosexual community collectively cringes at the thought of the existence of guys like you.

 

[midlifeflyer]

Phil,

I'm curious. Do you have the same second thoughts about descending to the depicted altitude on any other approach segment from procedure turn outbound to the MDA or DA?

If not, can you show me the rule or AIM paragraph that says it's okay?

I'm not trying to be a wise guy, but this is one of those situations in which you'll get 10 different answers from those who don't know the answer and only one from those who do.

 

[philo beddoe]

Ahhh grasshopper, but those occur after the IAF, hence I am absolutely confident that they are part of the approach, therefore I am established for certain.

A feeder route? I know that I am safe. but am I guaranteed that I am legal?
Probably, but I am not 100% convinced from the AIM reference you cite.
It is conceivable that the AIM reference was only intended to cover lateral navigation, not vertical.

Would I go ahead and go down to the feeder altitude with 'only' an approach clearance with an altitude to maintain until established? Sure, who is gonna ctch me non-radar. Muhahaha! Either way, this one is mostly academic for the reason I stated in my previous post.