Practice Approach Approved

avgeek11

avgeek11

Pre-Flight
Joined
Dec 13, 2015
Messages
30
Display Name
Display name:
avgeek11
A few of us were in the TRACON last week having a discussion while on break ...

I want to hear from the pilots on this one. You check in with me and ask for the practice ILS 27 Approach. I tell you to “maintain VFR, practice approach approved, no separation services provided”.

What are your expectations when you check in and ask for this approach? Are you looking for vectors to the final approach course, or do you want to shoot the approach on your own and I’ll keep you advised of traffic in the vicinity?

Please know, as someone that works at a Class Bravo, the volume and “workload permitting” factor is another part of the discussion.

On my end, if you’re asking for the service, I intend to provide you a service to the maximum extent possible when I said N12345 squawk XXXX.

Remember...this only applies to uncontrolled fields!

Anddddd go!
 
The only time I ask is if some part of the approach infringes on their airspace. If thats the case I am asking to enter their airspace and do not expect anything other than cleared. Uncontrolled, I have called before and asked for traffic in the area.
 
avgeek11 said:
What are your expectations when you check in and ask for this approach? Are you looking for vectors to the final approach course, or do you want to shoot the approach on your own and I’ll keep you advised of traffic in the vicinity?
Click to expand...

I just want to shoot an approach. If I get services then that's even better as practice radio work is useful to me.

But if you give me MVFRPAANSSP I'd be perfectly ok with that.
 
Unless I ask for vectors to final, I'm shooting the approach on my own and hoping you'll keep me advised of traffic. Otherwise Ill ask for vector to final in my initial contact.
 
Depends. Sometimes I’ll ask for direct to the IAF so we can do the procedure turn or sometimes we’ll just get vectors.
 
I usually throw in the words "own nav" or similar to make sure both parties know what's expected.
 
I would state that I would be flying the approach under own navigation. If I want vector to final I would request that. Simple as that, whether towered or nontowered airport where you provide ATC services.
 
Some pilots want the full approach, and some don't. If the pilot doesn't specify, the only way to find out if they have a preference is to ask them.
 
Only pet peeve I had was to verify you want it IFR or VFR. Had a VFR call up once asking for a practice IAP and I gave the usual “maintain VFR, practice approach approved, no separation services provided.” Came back with an attitude “what good does that do me??” He wanted to pick up a local IFR. That’s fine but say “looking to pick up a local IFR” then!
 
Velocity173 said:
Only pet peeve I had was to verify you want it IFR or VFR. Had a VFR call up once asking for a practice IAP and I gave the usual “maintain VFR, practice approach approved, no separation services provided.” Came back with an attitude “what good does that do me??” He wanted to pick up a local IFR. That’s fine but say “looking to pick up a local IFR” then!
Click to expand...
I think part of problem is that the Pilot/Controller Glossary does not say that a practice approach implies one that's conducted under VFR. It says it can be either VFR or IFR. That being said, since it can be either, I agree that pilots should specify which they want.

"PRACTICE INSTRUMENT APPROACH− An
instrument approach procedure conducted by a VFR
or an IFR aircraft for the purpose of pilot training or
proficiency demonstrations"
​
 
Where I'm at, we're normally vectored for the approach. If we want the full procedure, we have to ask for it. And, frequently we get, "....unable due to high traffic volume. .... Turn heading 270. Expect vectors to final."

If we're VFR, they will add the phrase "maintain VFR." Other than that, its just exactly like a for-realz instrument approach for the guy under the hood.
 
Palmpilot said:
I think part of problem is that the Pilot/Controller Glossary does not say that a practice approach implies one that's conducted under VFR. It says it can be either VFR or IFR. That being said, since it can be either, I agree that pilots should specify which they want.

"PRACTICE INSTRUMENT APPROACH− An
instrument approach procedure conducted by a VFR
or an IFR aircraft for the purpose of pilot training or
proficiency demonstrations"
​
Click to expand...

I think this particular pilot automatically assumed the request for a practice IAP meant IFR. A world of difference on the controller end, especially since this particular non towered airport (HXD) required a release from another controller (SAV) for IFRs.
 
avgeek11 said:
A few of us were in the TRACON last week having a discussion while on break ...

I want to hear from the pilots on this one. You check in with me and ask for the practice ILS 27 Approach. I tell you to “maintain VFR, practice approach approved, no separation services provided”.

What are your expectations when you check in and ask for this approach? Are you looking for vectors to the final approach course, or do you want to shoot the approach on your own and I’ll keep you advised of traffic in the vicinity?

Please know, as someone that works at a Class Bravo, the volume and “workload permitting” factor is another part of the discussion.

On my end, if you’re asking for the service, I intend to provide you a service to the maximum extent possible when I said N12345 squawk XXXX.

Remember...this only applies to uncontrolled fields!

Anddddd go!
Click to expand...

I don’t ‘expect’ you to do much else except call traffic if you see it and have time. If I wanna be vectored to final I’d ask. If you decided to just do it anyway I’d play along unless I wanted to do something else like start it from a particular fix, then I’d tell you. I’m curious though why you say “Remember...this only applies to uncontrolled fields.” There are lots of Towered airports that do not have a formal Practice Approach program in effect.
 
avgeek11 said:
A few of us were in the TRACON last week having a discussion while on break ...

I want to hear from the pilots on this one. You check in with me and ask for the practice ILS 27 Approach. I tell you to “maintain VFR, practice approach approved, no separation services provided”.

What are your expectations when you check in and ask for this approach? Are you looking for vectors to the final approach course, or do you want to shoot the approach on your own and I’ll keep you advised of traffic in the vicinity?

Please know, as someone that works at a Class Bravo, the volume and “workload permitting” factor is another part of the discussion.

On my end, if you’re asking for the service, I intend to provide you a service to the maximum extent possible when I said N12345 squawk XXXX.

Remember...this only applies to uncontrolled fields!

Anddddd go!
Click to expand...

This is just me, but if I call you for a practice approach in UCA for ILS27, I ask for vectors practice ILS27 Podunk. If I intend on doing a full procedure, I just request traffic and advise you I am doing full procedure ILS 27 Podunk.

Unfortunately most folks believe you are a mind reader and who knows what they expect.
 
avgeek11 said:
A few of us were in the TRACON last week having a discussion while on break ...

I want to hear from the pilots on this one. You check in with me and ask for the practice ILS 27 Approach. I tell you to “maintain VFR, practice approach approved, no separation services provided”.

What are your expectations when you check in and ask for this approach? Are you looking for vectors to the final approach course, or do you want to shoot the approach on your own and I’ll keep you advised of traffic in the vicinity?

Please know, as someone that works at a Class Bravo, the volume and “workload permitting” factor is another part of the discussion.

On my end, if you’re asking for the service, I intend to provide you a service to the maximum extent possible when I said N12345 squawk XXXX.

Remember...this only applies to uncontrolled fields!

Anddddd go!
Click to expand...
My $0.02.

Why would you be sitting a TRACON scope giving, "maintain VFR, practice approach approved, no separation services provided"? Bringing up that you work at a Class B doesn't really seem relevant. Are they asking to do practice approaches at ATL? Obviously not. The controller vectoring the final to ATL isn't also working the satellites.

To me, "maintain VFR, practice approach approved, no separation services provided" is for VFR towers to use when a pilot calls them and asks for a practice approach. That is the only place I've heard it used. How hard is it for a TRACON controller to send a VFR aircraft direct an IAF or vector to final and say "maintain VFR cleared RNAV XX approach"? That is providing a service. If you are so busy you can't do this but you can spit out "maintain VFR, practice approach approved, no separation services provided" then I'd think you'd be too busy to give effective traffic advisories anyway. Why not just say unable?
 
Radar Contact said:
My $0.02.

Why would you be sitting a TRACON scope giving, "maintain VFR, practice approach approved, no separation services provided"? Bringing up that you work at a Class B doesn't really seem relevant. Are they asking to do practice approaches at ATL? Obviously not. The controller vectoring the final to ATL isn't also working the satellites.

To me, "maintain VFR, practice approach approved, no separation services provided" is for VFR towers to use when a pilot calls them and asks for a practice approach. That is the only place I've heard it used. How hard is it for a TRACON controller to send a VFR aircraft direct an IAF or vector to final and say "maintain VFR cleared RNAV XX approach"? That is providing a service. If you are so busy you can't do this but you can spit out "maintain VFR, practice approach approved, no separation services provided" then I'd think you'd be too busy to give effective traffic advisories anyway. Why not just say unable?
Click to expand...

I can tell your experience with radar facilities is very limited. In no way shape or form am I quoting a VFR tower operation. A VFR tower such as a Class D may use this as they don’t provide any radar service but my above example is for radar facilities. I think others here too that do a lot of practice instrument training would agree as well. You’re far off on this topic.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Agree. DEN TRACON issues that phraseology for satellite airports with busy training traffic all the time.

It’s essentially saying, “Glad you’re talking to us, not going to do traffic advisories for you, but we can reach you when a jet comes screaming down out of the west to get y’all trainers out of their way, while you’re all messing around out there under the Bravo shelf. Thanks...”
 
Radar Contact said:
My $0.02.

Why would you be sitting a TRACON scope giving, "maintain VFR, practice approach approved, no separation services provided"? Bringing up that you work at a Class B doesn't really seem relevant. Are they asking to do practice approaches at ATL? Obviously not. The controller vectoring the final to ATL isn't also working the satellites.

To me, "maintain VFR, practice approach approved, no separation services provided" is for VFR towers to use when a pilot calls them and asks for a practice approach. That is the only place I've heard it used. How hard is it for a TRACON controller to send a VFR aircraft direct an IAF or vector to final and say "maintain VFR cleared RNAV XX approach"? That is providing a service. If you are so busy you can't do this but you can spit out "maintain VFR, practice approach approved, no separation services provided" then I'd think you'd be too busy to give effective traffic advisories anyway. Why not just say unable?
Click to expand...

If its not the primary airport and it doesn’t have an ARTCC LOA / letter to airmen stating separation services are provided, isn’t the OP required to issue the VFR “no seperation services provided” phraseology?
 
Last edited:
Velocity173 said:
If its not the primary airport and it doesn’t have an ARTCC LOA / LAA stating separation services are provided, isn’t the OP required to issue the VFR “no seperation services provided” phraseology?
Click to expand...
If you don't intend on providing separation services then that is correct.

The .65 states:
4−8−11. PRACTICE APPROACHES
a. Separation.
"Controller responsibility
for separation begins at the point where the approach
clearance becomes effective. Except for super or
heavy aircraft, 500 feet vertical separation may be
applied between VFR aircraft and between a VFR
and an IFR aircraft."
3. Where separation services are not provided to
VFR aircraft practicing instrument approaches, the
controller must;
(a) Instruct the pilot to maintain VFR.
(b) Advise the pilot that separation services
are not provided.
PHRASEOLOGY−
“(Aircraft identification) MAINTAIN VFR, PRACTICE
APPROACH APPROVED, NO SEPARATION SERVICES
PROVIDED.”

A TRACON controller can vector/clear a VFR for a practice approach and provide them separation services.

I just can't envision a scenario that the OP tries to describe where an airport's final will allow you to approve a pilot to do the practice approach but somehow you are too busy to ensure his separation. To me, it isn't good service from a TRACON. Now a VFR tower isn't allowed to provide separation services so they give that spiel and it makes sense. Our local Class D towers routinely tell VFR's that request the practice approach with them ..."practice approach approved, no separation services provided, report the marker".
 
denverpilot said:
Agree. DEN TRACON issues that phraseology for satellite airports with busy training traffic all the time.

It’s essentially saying, “Glad you’re talking to us, not going to do traffic advisories for you, but we can reach you when a jet comes screaming down out of the west to get y’all trainers out of their way, while you’re all messing around out there under the Bravo shelf. Thanks...”
Click to expand...

I think it's more of a culture thing. People were taught that you're at the show now, we are here to push tin, those little Flib's come last. It's a slow change and things are getting better...at least in my neck of the woods. In your scenario, if that jet is screaming towards the VFR's doing the practice approach then it's not like the controllers don't know about it. What I think they should be doing is a little of that ATC stuff and build an appropriate whole for the jet and control speeds and space to fit him in. Don't delay IFR traffic for practice approaches yes...but not actually control the practice approaches is a failure to me. Why sit back and let a mooney run over a 150 when you can vector/control it and let everyone get what they want? By all means, you can only fit a certain amount in an airport at a given time. Either there is room or not. If there is, work them in. If there isn't tell them unable due to traffic and give them an alternative. Another airport or expected delay for the approach.
 
avgeek11 said:
Comon! You and I both know with the handle “radar contact” I’d assume you might be an air traffic controller lol.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

It's not a secret. We all know he works ORD approach.
 
Potomac TRACON uses the "approved, no separation services provided" while Pittsburgh treated me much more similarly to an IFR flight. They even gave me an impromptu hold once for traffic. This is all VFR in Class E.
 
Radar Contact said:
If you don't intend on providing separation services then that is correct.

The .65 states:
4−8−11. PRACTICE APPROACHES
a. Separation.
"Controller responsibility
for separation begins at the point where the approach
clearance becomes effective. Except for super or
heavy aircraft, 500 feet vertical separation may be
applied between VFR aircraft and between a VFR
and an IFR aircraft."
3. Where separation services are not provided to
VFR aircraft practicing instrument approaches, the
controller must;
(a) Instruct the pilot to maintain VFR.
(b) Advise the pilot that separation services
are not provided.
PHRASEOLOGY−
“(Aircraft identification) MAINTAIN VFR, PRACTICE
APPROACH APPROVED, NO SEPARATION SERVICES
PROVIDED.”

A TRACON controller can vector/clear a VFR for a practice approach and provide them separation services.

I just can't envision a scenario that the OP tries to describe where an airport's final will allow you to approve a pilot to do the practice approach but somehow you are too busy to ensure his separation. To me, it isn't good service from a TRACON. Now a VFR tower isn't allowed to provide separation services so they give that spiel and it makes sense. Our local Class D towers routinely tell VFR's that request the practice approach with them ..."practice approach approved, no separation services provided, report the marker".
Click to expand...

I don’t think its about too busy to ensure his separation, it’s about providing a service that is within the given directives.

The 7210.3 makes it clear that the approach controller provides seperation to VFRs conducting an IAP at the primary airport. If it is to be provided at secondary airports then it must be covered in an covered in an LOA and a letter to airmen posted at local airports. The FAA’s website has a whole list of airports that are authorized for approved separation. If not on that list, then no separation services are given.
 
Velocity173 said:
I don’t think its about too busy to ensure his separation, it’s about providing a service that is within the given directives.

The 7210.3 makes it clear that the approach controller provides seperation to VFRs conducting an IAP at the primary airport. If it is to be provided at secondary airports then it must be covered in an covered in an LOA and a letter to airmen posted at local airports. The FAA’s website has a whole list of airports that are authorized for approved separation. If not on that list, then no separation services are given.
Click to expand...

I've never seen the FAA's site list. Do you have the link? This is from the 7210.3 and the way I read this is that we still provide them the services to the secondary airports as well. Maybe all our airports are on the list but we do it to all the VFR towers. It is obviously covered in our LOA's. I would imagine other large TRACON's would be the same. I've always considered both ORD and MDW as our primary...wonder if you can have two? Wonder what New York considers their primary? Or what SoCal considers...area specific to those facilities that have area's? I've always thought of this more for Class C's TRACON's and not large TRACON's.

From the 7210.3
10−4−5. PRACTICE INSTRUMENT
APPROACHES
a. VFR aircraft practicing instrument approaches
at the approach control’s primary airport must be
provided IFR separation in accordance with FAAO
JO 7110.65, Air Traffic Control, Chapter 4, Section
8, Approach Clearance Procedures.
NOTE−
The primary airport is the airport from which approach
control service is provided, except for remoted facilities
where the facility air traffic manager will designate the
primary report.
b. IFR separation to VFR aircraft in accordance
with FAAO JO 7110.65, Chapter 4, Section 8,
Approach Clearance Procedures, must be provided to
all secondary airports under the approach control’s
jurisdiction to the extent possible within existing
resources. Where separation service is provided to an
airport with a FSS that provides LAA, or a
nonapproach control tower, provisions for handling
such aircraft must be included in a LOA.
 
Radar Contact said:
I've never seen the FAA's site list. Do you have the link? This is from the 7210.3 and the way I read this is that we still provide them the services to the secondary airports as well. Maybe all our airports are on the list but we do it to all the VFR towers. It is obviously covered in our LOA's. I would imagine other large TRACON's would be the same. I've always considered both ORD and MDW as our primary...wonder if you can have two? Wonder what New York considers their primary? Or what SoCal considers...area specific to those facilities that have area's? I've always thought of this more for Class C's TRACON's and not large TRACON's.

From the 7210.3
10−4−5. PRACTICE INSTRUMENT
APPROACHES
a. VFR aircraft practicing instrument approaches
at the approach control’s primary airport must be
provided IFR separation in accordance with FAAO
JO 7110.65, Air Traffic Control, Chapter 4, Section
8, Approach Clearance Procedures.
NOTE−
The primary airport is the airport from which approach
control service is provided, except for remoted facilities
where the facility air traffic manager will designate the
primary report.
b. IFR separation to VFR aircraft in accordance
with FAAO JO 7110.65, Chapter 4, Section 8,
Approach Clearance Procedures, must be provided to
all secondary airports under the approach control’s
jurisdiction to the extent possible within existing
resources. Where separation service is provided to an
airport with a FSS that provides LAA, or a
nonapproach control tower, provisions for handling
such aircraft must be included in a LOA.
Click to expand...

Correct, and as it states, there must must be an LOA covering it for non approach towers and a letter to airmen such as this one authorizing specific airports. As you can see, not all secondary airports are covered. I would think, that is the situation that the OP is describing. If the OP’s facility authorizes approved IFR sep to ALL satellite fields, then the “no separation services” phraseology mentioned is incorrect.

https://www.faasafety.gov/files/notices/2010/Aug/Letter_to_Airmen_No._10-1.pdf
 
Last edited:
Radar Contact said:
I think it's more of a culture thing. People were taught that you're at the show now, we are here to push tin, those little Flib's come last. It's a slow change and things are getting better...at least in my neck of the woods. In your scenario, if that jet is screaming towards the VFR's doing the practice approach then it's not like the controllers don't know about it. What I think they should be doing is a little of that ATC stuff and build an appropriate whole for the jet and control speeds and space to fit him in. Don't delay IFR traffic for practice approaches yes...but not actually control the practice approaches is a failure to me. Why sit back and let a mooney run over a 150 when you can vector/control it and let everyone get what they want? By all means, you can only fit a certain amount in an airport at a given time. Either there is room or not. If there is, work them in. If there isn't tell them unable due to traffic and give them an alternative. Another airport or expected delay for the approach.
Click to expand...

They do provide plenty and good service between the actual IFRs and the ummm, semi-participating VFRs.

They just don’t have the bandwidth to provide it between the VFRs. Too many of us.

Might be three different VFRs working their way down the approach at (relatively) slow speeds (90 knots or slower), nobody going to run into each other and all planning to break it off and go do another one... and the controllers are “kinda” watching but don’t want to actually accept any more VFRs on a time-permitting basis... but appreciate that we’re all on frequency and available to answer up when the jet finally does arrive.

Otherwise we could all just hang out doing approaches all day and they’d have to wave off the IFR inbounds constantly because, like someone was talking about in another thread, “I’m not talking to them.”

Of course so they know who’s who, they usually tag us up with a squawk code, of course. But the “no VFR separation” thing is clear that we’re all watching out for each other and the controller is too busy to fully work us.

If they had to accept all of us and work us before “allowing” us to shoot approaches, nobody would ever get any training done in VMC.

Of course then there’s that highly annoying “wont do opposite direction approaches” thing that started a few years back. Stupid wind shift and we’re all booted out of the way and can’t practice anymore. Not on the ILS anyway. Can fly around to the other side of the airport and shoot the LPV if you have the gear.

“Break off the practice approach before Lincoln Ave” used to work just fine, or having us break it off even earlier to let a jet out IFR, whatever worked, until FAA decided that it didn’t anymore.

The “no VFR services” thing came well after the change to disallow opposite direction approaches but they both seem to be cut from the same “safety” cloth. Mandated from somewhere on high.

If the wind shifts to the south anybody with no /G just heads over to KFTG and bothers the DEN controllers in that sector over there instead.
 
Radar Contact said:
My $0.02.

Why would you be sitting a TRACON scope giving, "maintain VFR, practice approach approved, no separation services provided"? Bringing up that you work at a Class B doesn't really seem relevant. Are they asking to do practice approaches at ATL? Obviously not. The controller vectoring the final to ATL isn't also working the satellites.

To me, "maintain VFR, practice approach approved, no separation services provided" is for VFR towers to use when a pilot calls them and asks for a practice approach. That is the only place I've heard it used. How hard is it for a TRACON controller to send a VFR aircraft direct an IAF or vector to final and say "maintain VFR cleared RNAV XX approach"? That is providing a service. If you are so busy you can't do this but you can spit out "maintain VFR, practice approach approved, no separation services provided" then I'd think you'd be too busy to give effective traffic advisories anyway. Why not just say unable?
Click to expand...

There are situations where "maintain VFR, practice approach approved, no separation services provided" is for VFR towers to use when a pilot calls them and asks for a practice approach," doesn't cover all the bases. Take Class C airspace for example. Some D's are surrounded by C. Most of the Approach, the turns to final, the intermediate and initial segements are in C. There are separation requirements there. Not much, green between(targets don't touch in controller speak), but requirements non the less. Pilots are going to be making their requests to Approach because that is who they gotta be talkin to, to be there in the first place. Approach can be establishing traffic on final using the 'separation services not provided rule, maintaining a safe and orderly sequence without having to keep the whole 3 miles apart.
 
To answer your question OP, I'd expect you to give me the maintain VFR schpeal followed by an initial vector, then the PTAC and tell me to have a nice freakin' day. In turn, even if you don't give me exactly what I want, I'm gonna tell you to have a nice freakin' day too because I'm a nice guy.
 
Here they ask if you want vectors or to navigate on your own. Basically all I want out of it is traffic advisories, and to not mess up the flow or to have to term my approach early
 
ja_user said:
Here they ask if you want vectors or to navigate on your own. Basically all I want out of it is traffic advisories, and to not mess up the flow or to have to term my approach early
Click to expand...

Around here we’ll even accept terminating early. Just too much bizjet traffic to not expect to be “spun off” the approaches once in a while.

I heard a controller tell a practice approach here one day...

“Make a big wide 360 to the west for me for the one percenters behind you... then expect vectors back to the final approach course...” LOL.
 
I see a lot of different opinions, interesting.

If I call you and ask for a practice approach, I expect you to give me the usual approach, as if I was one of the IFR guys. So if you normally give VTF, that's what I'd expect.
If I want something else, I should ask for it, such as IAF, PT, hold etc. No way am I expecting you to read my mind and do what I secretly wish for. I am a dude, not a chick.

And yes, I absolutely expect "maintain VFR", it's a practice approach and I sure as heck have a SP sitting next to me looking for airplanes, birds and drones.
(logically, if I cannot maintain VFR, whyTF would I be asking for a practice approach? I better file and fly a real approach since the weather is not conducive to VFR)
 
BigBadLou said:
I see a lot of different opinions, interesting.

If I call you and ask for a practice approach, I expect you to give me the usual approach, as if I was one of the IFR guys. So if you normally give VTF, that's what I'd expect.
If I want something else, I should ask for it, such as IAF, PT, hold etc. No way am I expecting you to read my mind and do what I secretly wish for. I am a dude, not a chick.

And yes, I absolutely expect "maintain VFR", it's a practice approach and I sure as heck have a SP sitting next to me looking for airplanes, birds and drones.
(logically, if I cannot maintain VFR, whyTF would I be asking for a practice approach? I better file and fly a real approach since the weather is not conducive to VFR)
Click to expand...

Folk do Practice Approaches in the goo all the time. Getting some ‘actual’ in training is a good thing. ATC is just not supposed to delay intenerent traffic for you. You can expect to get vectored around and maybe go to some holding somewhere waiting for your turn. That’s good for training to.

−8−11. PRACTICE APPROACHES
Except for military aircraft operating at military
airfields, ensure that neither VFR nor IFR practice
approaches disrupt the flow of other arriving and
departing IFR or VFR aircraft. Authorize, withdraw
authorization, or refuse to authorize practice
approaches as traffic conditions require. Normally,
approaches in progress should not be terminated.
NOTE−
The priority afforded other aircraft over practice
instrument approaches is not intended to be so rigidly
applied that it causes grossly inefficient application of
services.
 
luvflyin said:
Folk do Practice Approaches in the goo all the time. Getting some ‘actual’ in training is a good thing. ATC is just not supposed to delay intenerent traffic for you. You can expect to get vectored around and maybe go to some holding somewhere waiting for your turn. That’s good for training to.

−8−11. PRACTICE APPROACHES
Except for military aircraft operating at military
airfields, ensure that neither VFR nor IFR practice
approaches disrupt the flow of other arriving and
departing IFR or VFR aircraft. Authorize, withdraw
authorization, or refuse to authorize practice
approaches as traffic conditions require. Normally,
approaches in progress should not be terminated.
NOTE−
The priority afforded other aircraft over practice
instrument approaches is not intended to be so rigidly
applied that it causes grossly inefficient application of
services.
Click to expand...

Yep. Many times I would take students out VFR with just over 1,000 OVC. Just high enough for VFR training mins but low enough for the 2,000 MVA for the PAR/ILS in IMC. Call up approach for a local IFR for a practice approach with a low approach.
 
I do not understand.
In my book, a practice approach is done in VMC.
Approach in IMC is just an approach, an actual approach. You gotta file and you must fly the approach. No practice here. Yes, it can be used for/in training but it doesn't make it a practice approach.
Again, I might be mis-understanding.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top