Search

Notices
Flight Schools and Training Ratings, building hours, airmanship, CFI topics

Ifr Question...

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old 10-24-2006 | 02:32 PM
  #1  
BEWELCH's Avatar
Thread Starter
Line Holder
 
Joined: Dec 2005
Posts: 83
Likes: 0
From: C-172
Default Ifr Question...

When Do We Need A Departure Alternate???
Reply
Old 10-24-2006 | 04:09 PM
  #2  
rickair7777's Avatar
Prime Minister/Moderator
Veteran: Navy
 
Joined: Jan 2006
Posts: 44,861
Likes: 658
From: Engines Turn or People Swim
Default

It's depends on whether you're talking 91, 135, or 121.
Reply
Old 10-24-2006 | 04:23 PM
  #3  
Ottopilot's Avatar
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined: May 2006
Posts: 2,576
Likes: 0
From: 737 CA
Default

The basic rule of thumb is: if you cannot land at your departure airport, you need a takeoff alternate. That's the simple easy short answer. There are longer ones.
Reply
Old 10-24-2006 | 04:49 PM
  #4  
Puppyz's Avatar
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 367
Likes: 0
Default

nice avatar otto, i liked that movie .
Reply
Old 10-24-2006 | 05:44 PM
  #5  
multipilot's Avatar
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 780
Likes: 0
Default

Part 91 does not require any takeoff mins under IFR. Legally you can take off in zero/zero. There is a line between being legal and common sense. As a good rule of thumb, if the ceiling and visibility are lower than the minimums published in an instrument approach back into your departure airport then it's probably not a good idea to take off right away. 91.175(f)

Part 135 says that you cannot takeoff under IFR from an airport where weather conditions are at or above takeoff minimums but are below authorized IFR landing minimums unless there is an alternate airport within 1 hour's flying time of the departure airport. 135.217
Reply
Old 10-24-2006 | 08:12 PM
  #6  
tomgoodman's Avatar
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined: Feb 2006
Posts: 6,248
Likes: 0
From: 767A (Ret)
Default Single-engine return

As I recall, our procedures required a takeoff alternate if the wx was below Cat I, allowing for the loss of an engine. (Single-engine coupled approaches weren't authorized.) That was a "gotcha" on almost every recurrent simulator check. Interestingly, an instructor said that the MD-88 was quite capable of such an approach, but Delta didn't "buy the certification" for it.
Reply
Old 10-25-2006 | 03:57 AM
  #7  
kerns bbo's Avatar
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 124
Likes: 0
From: BE9,10,20
Default

Also remember that if you take off with very poor weather conditions (even 91) and were to say go off the side of the runway you can still get sited under 91.14 (reckless and careless).
Reply
Old 10-25-2006 | 08:18 AM
  #8  
rickair7777's Avatar
Prime Minister/Moderator
Veteran: Navy
 
Joined: Jan 2006
Posts: 44,861
Likes: 658
From: Engines Turn or People Swim
Default

Originally Posted by kerns bbo
Also remember that if you take off with very poor weather conditions (even 91) and were to say go off the side of the runway you can still get sited under 91.14 (reckless and careless).
Stupid and ignorant operation of an airplane is 91.13
Reply
Old 10-25-2006 | 02:21 PM
  #9  
mistarose's Avatar
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined: Jan 2006
Posts: 275
Likes: 0
From: Furloughed
Default Another Ifr Question

My CFII checkride is this Friday, no worries. This question came up yesterday when I was flying this approach in a Frasca 242 sim.

Why is there a "3200" and a "3300" listed for the glideslop intercept altitude? Which do you use, and why are their two altitudes listed here? It is the same on the Jeppesen approach plate I was using.

Thanks in advance

Here is the link: http://edj.net/cgi-bin/echoplate.pl?...ALW_i_lr20.gif
Reply
Old 10-25-2006 | 02:53 PM
  #10  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined: Oct 2005
Posts: 955
Likes: 0
From: 737 Right
Default

Originally Posted by mistarose
Why is there a "3200" and a "3300" listed for the glideslop intercept altitude? Which do you use, and why are their two altitudes listed here? It is the same on the Jeppesen approach plate I was using.
Been a while since I've looked at NOS plates (and I don't have the Jepps for WA), but here's what I think: 3300 is the GS intercept altitude, as shown by the lightening bolt. 3200 is the minimum altitude for that segment when not using the GS (as shown by the *LOC only notation).
Reply
Related Topics
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
MustangFa1con
Cargo
9
07-16-2006 07:26 PM
bigD
Flight Schools and Training
11
05-24-2006 11:17 AM
cargo hopeful
Cargo
21
03-05-2006 06:12 AM
Cjp21
Major
6
02-28-2006 06:44 PM

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On



Your Privacy Choices