IAF on FP

[profile]

I did a search of the forum but have not found a direct answer to this question. This question pertains to a 121 operation in a B727/A, so limited to Class I navigation.



Routing filed in the flight plan is BTV...LEB...PWM. No VOR on the field at PWM. Debate is if this routing is legal. Some would argue that there would be no way to navigate it in the event of NORDO or an ATC radar failure. I believe this is the ATC Pref route, however.



Does an IAF need to be included in the flight plan? If you believe so, please support that. If you do not believe so, anything to support that aside from common practice?

 

[Singlecoil]

Is PWM within the operational service volume of LEB? If so, then no problem.

 

[integrale]

Purpose of flight plan:
“The purpose of the flight
plan is to relay the desires of
the pilot to the controller.” FLIP GP

IFR - Last fix entered is:
Identifier of nearest Initial Approach Fix (IAF)
Navaid
First point of intended landing
Published fix which clearly establishes the route of flight to destination

I don't think that there is a question of legality here, it is what as the PIC do you want on your flight plan to make your intentions known to ATC, and not what you can get by with.

 

[avbug]

No requirement to use an IAF for an approach has ever existed. You may file direct to the destination, and upon arrival in a lost comm situation, you may commence any approach. Suppose you file one IAF, but winds and conditions have changed enroute to favor another? You're not expected to arrive and fly to the filed IAF and commence an approach to an unfavorable runway. You arrive, and you land.

KPWM has 9 approaches, each of which have an IAF, or several IAF's, from which to choose. You could file to any of them, nor none of them. Filing direct to the airport without including arrival routing or an IAF is perfectly legal, and perfectly safe.

Upon arrival, pick an approach and fly it.

For perspective, direct routing is standard filing for many parts of the western United States. With this in mind, if one files direct from one airport to another, each of these filings and clearances would not be legal, but this is clearly not the case. That an IAF or a navaid isn't filed isn't relevant. You can file from any point to any point.

I believe your question is specifically how you would be legal navigating to the airport, if there's no navaid to identify the airport. You must be able to fix your position under Class 1 navigation, but you are not required to fly navaid to navaid. You could, conceivably, fly anywhere to anywhere using any method you choose that can reliably fix your position, or any combination of methods to do the same. Likewise, you can do this to identify the airport, without the presence of a VOR on the field. You can do it with cross radials, a radial and a DME, a bearing from the NDB on the ILS and a radial/DME, etc.

Most OpSpecs allowing for RNAV require the same thing, that the operator be able to reliably fix his position with other means during the course of the flight, and to continuously monitor and use existing navaids...this really isn't any different.

 

[Vector4fun]

Routing filed in the flight plan is BTV...LEB...PWM. No VOR on the field at PWM. Debate is if this routing is legal. Some would argue that there would be no way to navigate it in the event of NORDO or an ATC radar failure. I believe this is the ATC Pref route, however.

I wouldn't worry about ATC radar failure. If we loose radar, but the radios still work, we're going to have to give a bunch of revised clearances that will be based on traffic, ability of area facilities to take over services, and approaches in use at destination. In other words, It's ATC's problem, and our solution probably will likely differ from what you filed anyway.

Now, if you knew the radar was down, or scheduled to be, before departure, that might be a minor consideration.

 

[profile]

Thanks. Avbugs response was exactly in line of what I have understood. Now if I can just convince the masses! My question was less on the legality but more on how I can prove that it is legal to someone that really believes otherwise.

 

[TonyC]

Now if I can just convince the masses! My question was less on the legality but more on how I can prove that it is legal to someone that really believes otherwise.

It seems to me the burden of proof should be on the other side of the argument -- prove that it's NOT legal.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but the only element in the routing portion of that flight plan is LEB; BTV and PWM are the Departure airfield and Destination airfield, respectively. As it happens, LEB is a departure fix on a published departure from BTV. I hope it's legal, 'cuz I've done it!


In fact, we have lots of flight plans with the same situation - - no VOR on the field, last fix in the flight plan is not an IAF. ATC doesn't complain, and we manage to find the airfields.




.

 

[profile]

Tony

We're on the same page.

 

[I fLy pLaNeS]

IAF Question

Purpose of flight plan:
“The purpose of the flight
plan is to relay the desires of
the pilot to the controller.” FLIP GP

IFR - Last fix entered is:
Identifier of nearest Initial Approach Fix (IAF)
Navaid
First point of intended landing
Published fix which clearly establishes the route of flight to destination

I don't think that there is a question of legality here, it is what as the PIC do you want on your flight plan to make your intentions known to ATC, and not what you can get by with.

Where did you get that "Last fix entered" from?

Thanks!

Johann

 

[RipCurl]

Slight hijack:

Say I file direct KABC-KXYZ and assume KXYZ has no transition route of any kind. Halfway there, my radios crap out on me. When do I leave my direct course and head off to an IAF? Do I fly to the field and then to the fix? Do I break it off 10 miles out?