IFR Alternate question
#1
Line Holder
Thread Starter
Joined APC: Dec 2007
Position: Right Seat, Cessna 402/421
Posts: 44
IFR Alternate question
Help. I'm a CFII and I feel either a.) surrounded by idiots, or b.) an idiot myself.
This is the situation. It is a clear blue and a million day. I am filing an IFR flight plan for a flight to an airport WITHOUT an IAP. Must I file an alternate just because this airport does not have an approach? I was under the impression that if the weather at your destination was GREATER THAN the 1-2-3 rule, you were kosher to NOT file an alternate. Please shed some light on this.
Thanks.
This is the situation. It is a clear blue and a million day. I am filing an IFR flight plan for a flight to an airport WITHOUT an IAP. Must I file an alternate just because this airport does not have an approach? I was under the impression that if the weather at your destination was GREATER THAN the 1-2-3 rule, you were kosher to NOT file an alternate. Please shed some light on this.
Thanks.
#2
Yes.
Its kind of double speak, but 91.169 says a2 (the 1-2-3 rule) does not apply if the first airport had an IAP AND you are good to to go on 1-2-3. No IAP and you don't get to try out the 1-2-3 rule. 91.169 says you must have an ateranate unless you can escape with 91.169b 1&2.
Its kind of double speak, but 91.169 says a2 (the 1-2-3 rule) does not apply if the first airport had an IAP AND you are good to to go on 1-2-3. No IAP and you don't get to try out the 1-2-3 rule. 91.169 says you must have an ateranate unless you can escape with 91.169b 1&2.
#7
#8
Yes you can do that. I don't think there are even any regulatory limits regarding Wx at the fix either, but common sense obviously is required. You cancel IFR at the clearance limit, unless you change your mind and desire further IFR clearance (ie back to point of origin).
#9
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Nov 2008
Posts: 826
It's taught as though filing the alternate is the exception. IOW, "you only have to file an alternate when..."
I think the rule is more understandable if it's taught the way the rule puts it:
==============================
... each person filing an IFR flight plan must include in it the following information:
...Except as provided in paragraph (b) of this section, an alternate airport.
==============================
IOW, "you always have to file an alternate unless certain conditions apply."
Those conditions are pretty clearly stated: an instrument approach procedure for the destination and the "1-2-3" weather rule.
#10
Unlike BLott4 I don't think it's double-speak. I think the problem is the way it's usually taught.
It's taught as though filing the alternate is the exception. IOW, "you only have to file an alternate when..."
I think the rule is more understandable if it's taught the way the rule puts it:
==============================
... each person filing an IFR flight plan must include in it the following information:
...Except as provided in paragraph (b) of this section, an alternate airport.
==============================
IOW, "you always have to file an alternate unless certain conditions apply."
Those conditions are pretty clearly stated: an instrument approach procedure for the destination and the "1-2-3" weather rule.
It's taught as though filing the alternate is the exception. IOW, "you only have to file an alternate when..."
I think the rule is more understandable if it's taught the way the rule puts it:
==============================
... each person filing an IFR flight plan must include in it the following information:
...Except as provided in paragraph (b) of this section, an alternate airport.
==============================
IOW, "you always have to file an alternate unless certain conditions apply."
Those conditions are pretty clearly stated: an instrument approach procedure for the destination and the "1-2-3" weather rule.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post