Part 135 Destination WX Reporting

[InHot]

Scenario: Part 135.

Ops Spec (C077) “Terminal VFR, Limitations, and Provisions” allows for VFR in terminal area (with requisite weather).

Ops Specs (A010) “Aeronautical Weather Data” authorizes weather reports and forecasts in IFR operations which are prepared by the National Weather Service (NWS), or source approved by the national weather service, or other source approved by the FAA.

Source approved by the NWS include the following:
1. NWS Field facilities
2. Flight Service Stations
3. Supplemental aviation weather reporting stations (SWARS)
4. Limited aviation reporting stations (LAWRS)
5. Automated surface observations

Sources approved by the FAA include the following:
1. Any meteorological office operated by a foreign state which subscribes to ICAO standards and practices.
2. Any U.S. military weather reporting source

You are scheduled to fly Part 135 into a field that has two approaches, but has no weather reporting. The approaches allow the use of an altimeter setting from a nearby field (6 miles) that has AWOS.

Can you legally file to the field with no weather reporting as your destination (with an alternate) and land at the field… if upon arrival overhead at MEA you as the PIC determine from your own observations that the field has VFR conditions?

Reference: FAR 135.213 Weather reports and forecasts

(a) Whenever a person operating an aircraft under this part is required to use a weather report or forecast, that person shall use that of the U.S. National Weather Service, a source approved by the U.S. National Weather Service, or a source approved by the Administrator. However, for operations under VFR, the pilot in command may, if such a report is not available, use weather information based on that pilot’s own observations or those of other persons competent to supply appropriate observations.

Legal?

Does the fact the Ops Spec don't mention FAR 135.213 preclude you from using it? Remember A010 states:

"Sources approved by the FAA include the following:..." (Italics are mine).

Does the use of "include" mean the list that follows that phrase is not all inclusive and therefore allows the use of FAR 135.213?

By the way; what a sad state of affairs that we have to become sea lawyers to understand and interpret this garbage we call reguations. But, that's the hand we have been dealt.

Any comments?

 

[cvsfly]

C077 is applicable to turbojet ops. I'm just reading C077 - http://www.faa.gov/avr/afs/faa/8400/ - since we don't operate turbojets, but I don't see any reference to weather "reporting" just 135.205 ( VFR: visibility req.) and 91.155 (Basic VFR wx mins). It also suggests that IFR operations is preferable when an ATC facility is available. The weather reporting requirement in 135.213 are only for IFR operations. If VFR you are using your own observations (135.213.(a)) I don't worry about about filing IFR to a VFR only or an airport with approaches but no wx reporting (although technically you should file IFR to clearance limit point and the proceed on a VFR flight plan or company flight plan to your destination)as long as I have an alternate and am sure the weather (using FA forecasts or other means) will allow a VFR descent and approach to the airport from a MEA or MVA. So the wx data under A010 doesn't apply to VFR. Now if you get cleared for an IAP (IFR operation) to airport in question, then you must meet the wx reporting requirements. Nothing to prevent you from flying (not cleared for and cancelled IFR) a published procedure as long as you have VFR wx min determined by your observations. Welcome to the nebulous world of 135!

 

[501261]

I don't know, seems to me like you are giving your POI a reason to look more closely into the flight (and when they look they'll find something!), filing an IFR into a no weather airport. Now how can the POI know that you cancelled IFR before starting an IAP?

Simple thing to do is simply not bother with it at all. Simply fie IFR to a "legal" (weather, IAP's) that is beyond your no weather destination, then cancel your IFR when your overhead and land normally!

 

[InHot]

501261

5---

You're right about POI s looking for things. However, I endeavor to make decisions that will cause me no regrets - should somebody Monday morning quarterback me.

While I agree filing to one place and then landing at another might work, it's not the way I conduct business.

If it can't be done within the regs, I don't do it. Should a fed become aware of filing to one field and then landing at another under the circumstances we're discussing - I think he might have a problem with that.

Back to my original post. I believe the scenario while unusual is legal and competely defensible to anyone who might ask.

Again I said "I believe it's legal" - I'm looking for others to comment on the legality of the scenario as I described in my original post.

Thanks,

 

[cvsfly]

I'm assuming that you want to be on an IFR flight plan all the way to destination and plan on a VFR approach at an airport with IAPs but no wx reporting. Also assuming domestic ops with a minimum of remote destinations. The way I see it, to be totally legal and be without question - considering FAR 135.79 (flight locating), 135.205, 135.213, 91.155, Ops Spec C077, A010, etc.- you would depart IFR on IFR flight plan from an airport with wx reporting file to a fix at or before your destination (actual airport of intended arrival) cancel IFR at that point and activate a FAA VFR flight plan or better yet continue VFR on a company flight plan the rest of the way to the airport and make a visual approach. Either scenario may or may not peak your POIs interest and you may have to explain your flight planning. If I'm going to worry that the POI is going to start asking questions and investigating every move and flight planning decision I make, I'm just going to stay on the ground. My paperwork is legitamate and accurate. I operate with safety in mind first, which most of the time meets the letter of the law, and then consider the efficiency of the flight. I prefer to operate IFR as long as possible under positive ATC control with a smooth efficient transition of release of ATC control and radio comm. (I'll be monoriting unicom well before the airport and I'll cancel IFR preferably 10 miles out to attempt to coordinate my arrival with other VFR traffic and I don't shoot an IAP unless I have all the prerequist items in place. Filing IFR all the way to your destination and conducting an IFR operation/procedure at that airport, in my view are separate deals. We do not maintain records of our flight plans after the fact. Who is to know where we transitioned from IFR to VFR. ATC sure doesn't want to be the policeman here and they usually don't have working knowledge of even the standard Ops Specs. The only problem I see coming up is if you make a habit of trying to finese a VFR arrival in marginal weather and making ATC and other traffic attempt to make allowances for your poor planning (you had reasonable assuance that you had VFR weather prior to lauching and you updated weather enroute, right?) I don't need a single ASOS (I use as many weather sources as I can to make planning decisions) to tell me that the weather around my destination may not allow a VFR arrival and I have an alternate anyway. If not tell the customer arrival at said airport may not be feasible and file to a legal IFR airport. Hopefully all of this legal wx reporting wrangling will be mute soon. The fractional Part 91 K is also supposed to come out with amedments to 135 to level the playing field in this matter.

 

[InHot]

CVS,

Thanks, I agree with your decision making. Safety first. When I brief a new copliot I tell him my priorities are:

1. Safety of the passengers and crew
2. Protecting our certificates
3. Timely and comfortabe delivery of our passengers to their destination.

If you're ever in doubt about a decision you're about to make, don't make it. Ask yourself - "What would the NTSB write about this decision in the post accident investigation?"

Of course there will always be "grey" areas - and there will be times you will have to make some difficult decisions...and there are exceptions to every rule... But...generally, if you follow those guidelines everything else will fall into place.

Back to your recent post -everything you wrote makes sense. I guess the crux of my original post is whether - due to OPS Spec A-010 which lists the approved sources of weather - am I authorized to make use of FAR 135.213 and make my own observations upon arrival?

From my original post:

Does the fact the Ops Spec don't mention FAR 135.213 preclude you from using it? Remember A010 states:

"Sources approved by the FAA include the following:..." (Italics are mine).

Does the use of "include" mean the list that follows that phrase is not all inclusive and therefore allows the use of FAR 135.213?

By the way we're required to always file IFR when conducting Part 135. However, Ops Spec C077 does alow me to conduct VFR Terninal Operations, providing I meet the requirements (basically have VFR weather and maintain within 10 miles from destination).

 

[cvsfly]

I understand your legal logistics now. I still don't think being on an IFR flight plan all the way to your destination, determine the weather to be VFR by your own observation according to 135.213 (a), and make a VFR approach to be unreasonable. I guess having to be on an IFR flight plan according to your Operations Manual Section L (flight locating procedures)(?) and trying to figure out how to make a VFR approach (because a "visual" approach on an IFR flight plan is still an IFR operation, correct?) without cancelling IFR prior to landing.

From time to time I find things in the Ops Specs and the regs that are seemingly contradictory. The past couple of years since I became a Chief Pilot and become responsible for our Ops Specs, has been an excercize in frustration. We had many errors introduced on the FSDO's side and had Ops Specs issued that were contradictory to others. It took awhile to iron them out. They switched to a new computer system that generates the Ops Spec a year or two ago and they had a significant learning curve not to mention my own. I also learned that some Ops Specs are not required to be standard and there is some flexibility in configuring them to your operation. Case in point: (we are a "basic" 135 operator) Ops Spec A008 Operational Control - we were able to rewrite that to better coincide with our operation. Originally it was issued to us with "standard" language without asking questions. Many don't operate like it, but the FSDO is there to serve the operator, not the other way around. The operator has to ask the questions (and not be afraid of the answers) of the POI to get things right and in order because they won't volunteer the information until they find a discrepancy. It's up to you to find it first.

You may be able to add language in A010 to address VFR approaches and you maybe able to add the reference for 135.213 that you need. Good luck.