Breaking off ILS at class c airport to fly to class d airport

TheGolfPilot

TheGolfPilot

Line Up and Wait
Joined
Jan 16, 2015
Messages
786
Location
Modesto, CA
Display Name
Display name:
Golfpilot
For example. I want to go to Reid-hillview (krhv) airport but the weather is 1,500 overcast and my plane is /A. How upset would ATC be with me if I filed to San Jose airport, cancelled IFR 500' below the overcast, and mozied over to hillview? What would be the correct way to explain what I am doing? Would they likely make it easy for me or be difficult? Anybody have any experience with something like this?
 
I've done this - flying the ILS at RDU with the intent of breaking it off and proceeding my private home base. I just tell them what I'm doing and they handle me as desired. These have both ended at RDU and ended at home.

I've also done the RNAV to a local Class D and landed home. I always let ATC know my intent and have encountered no problems..
 
You'll be in the way of arriving purple 737s. I think you'll spend a lot of time holding.

However, the Moffett ILS is often used for practice approaches, broken off prior to crossing 101 and then proceeding to Palo Alto. The ILS on Oakland's 28R is also not that crowded (stay off 30's, though).

It's pretty crowded airspace for scud running. Not a lot of obstacles on the valley floor, though.

I'd want a ceiling at least 2500 to do what you're contemplating. Fortunately, that's common at Reid even when the marine layer is in.
 
Before the FRZ and the SFRA, that was one of the instrument approach methods into Hyde - use the ADW ILS. Just had to ask.
 
No problem at all - when interrogated about your intentions simply say that you do your ILS approach, break off and fly VFR to your destination. That should be IFR plan Y (technically) - I do it on regular basis.
 
Didn't think of using moffett. Good idea. So I would file to moffett then just let the approach controller know I will cancel IFR as soon as I am vfr and will want to cross san jose midfield to land at hillview?
 
Aye - and the controller would give you VFR instructions to your destination
 
And understand SVFR if you don't have sufficient cloud clearance requirements for VFR (i.e. 500 below clouds, visibility, etc.) as you may need to request SVFR if both fields are IFR.
 
Brad Z said:
And understand SVFR if you don't have sufficient cloud clearance requirements for VFR (i.e. 500 below clouds, visibility, etc.) as you may need to request SVFR if both fields are IFR.
Click to expand...


:rofl:.. Good luck doing that on a pop up VFR request...
 
Brad Z said:
Fly approach airport 'A' and cancel IFR continuing SVFR to airport 'B'. Where's the pop-up?
Click to expand...

Pop up was a bad reference.... But, if he shoots an approach , gets 501 feet below the layer and wants a SVFR across 2 busy airports... I would consider that a kinda pop up....

Correct me if I am wrong but you cannot get a SVFR when any inbound or outbound flights are active ???:dunno:
 
Last edited:
Interersting.

Which Class D?

The nearest are Kinston, Winston Salem and Simmons AAF.

I ask this because during my PPC traning, I got quizzed about the closest Class D to KFAY and it took me a minute to find Simmons Class D.

Is your home base on the charts?

Bill Watson said:
I've done this - flying the ILS at RDU with the intent of breaking it off and proceeding my private home base. I just tell them what I'm doing and they handle me as desired. These have both ended at RDU and ended at home.

I've also done the RNAV to a local Class D and landed home. I always let ATC know my intent and have encountered no problems..
Click to expand...
 
Kelvin said:
Interersting.

Which Class D?

The nearest are Kinston, Winston Salem and Simmons AAF.

I ask this because during my PPC traning, I got quizzed about the closest Class D to KFAY and it took me a minute to find Simmons Class D.

Is your home base on the charts?
Click to expand...
My bad, I actually meant an uncontrolled airport - Oxford Henderson specifically. My home base is 8NC8.

I'm alphabetically challenged.

I'm thinking that I'd rather do such a maneuver at a Class C or uncontrolled airport rather than at some Class Ds I'm familiar with.... anyone else feel this way? Why?
 
Tomorrow is supposed to be between a 1400 and 3000 overcast at san jose. I am going to file from concord bchn9.sablo oak direct to moffet and ask for the Loc/dme 14l. I should be able to break out on the approach, get 500 below, cancel ifr and continue to reidhillview under the san jose class c northern skirt.

If I'm unlucky they will give me some off the wall routing... but I think this plan stays clear of all 3 major departure and arrival routes so it may work.

If its a 3k layer i could fly under vfr the whole way too...
 
It works really well and we used to do it all the time in Springfield, MO. We'd shoot the approach into KSGF and then break off and fly across town to 3DW (3DW was class E).

Of course, it helps to know where all the towers are...and hope that they didn't put up a new one that you don't know about...lest you wind up like this guy:

http://www.news-leader.com/story/ne...gfield-fire-seen-injuries-uncertain/20328547/
 
Bill Watson said:
My bad, I actually meant an uncontrolled airport - Oxford Henderson specifically. My home base is 8NC8.

I'm alphabetically challenged.

I'm thinking that I'd rather do such a maneuver at a Class C or uncontrolled airport rather than at some Class Ds I'm familiar with.... anyone else feel this way? Why?
Click to expand...
I can't see why it would make a difference, other than the obvious, that Lake Ridge is only 10 NM from RDU and twice that dustance from HNZ.

As an aside, SVFR is problematic since SVFR requires you be "within the airspace contained by the upward extension of the lateral boundaries of the controlled airspace designated to the surface for an airport." IOW, within a area that is controlled airspace to the surface.
 
Actually, he would be. Both Moffett and Reid directly abut the San Jose class C surface area.

But I think there may be a few too many purple 737s around for SVFR.

The forecast is for VFR, improving over the day.

If all else fails, you can land at Hayward or Oakland, both of which have non-GPS approaches. Does it HAVE to be Reid?
 
Bill Watson said:
My bad, I actually meant an uncontrolled airport - Oxford Henderson specifically. My home base is 8NC8.

I'm alphabetically challenged.

I'm thinking that I'd rather do such a maneuver at a Class C or uncontrolled airport rather than at some Class Ds I'm familiar with.... anyone else feel this way? Why?
Click to expand...

Copy.
8NC8 looks like a cool place.
 
N801BH said:
Pop up was a bad reference.... But, if he shoots an approach , gets 501 feet below the layer and wants a SVFR across 2 busy airports... I would consider that a kinda pop up....

Correct me if I am wrong but you cannot get a SVFR when any inbound or outbound flights are active ???:dunno:
Click to expand...

IFR operations get priority over SVFR, but active IFR operations do not preclude SVFR operations.

From the chapter 7, section 5 of FAA order 7110.65 (controller handbook): "SVFR flights may be approved only if arriving and departing IFR aircraft are not delayed."
 
As others have said, this is a common practice. When transferred over to the tower controller, after announcing inbound, say something like you "intend to break off when VFR, destination landing Reid-Hillview".

If you intend to get there fairly early in the day (before 8am), you may not experience delays at SJC. If the ceilings in the east and south bays are at least 1,700, an option will be to do an approach into OAK 28s to get under, break off, and proceed to RHV (just follow 880). You will have to talk to HWD and SJC for transition, though.
 
Brad Z said:
IFR operations get priority over SVFR, but active IFR operations do not preclude SVFR operations.

From the chapter 7, section 5 of FAA order 7110.65 (controller handbook): "SVFR flights may be approved only if arriving and departing IFR aircraft are not delayed."
Click to expand...

That is the "catch phrase" ATC uses to deny SVFR stuff here in Jackson Hole.. It is alot easier to just depart before the tower opens in the morning or after they close at night...:rolleyes2:
 
TheGolfPilot said:
Tomorrow is supposed to be between a 1400 and 3000 overcast at san jose. I am going to file from concord bchn9.sablo oak direct to moffet and ask for the Loc/dme 14l. I should be able to break out on the approach, get 500 below, cancel ifr and continue to reidhillview under the san jose class c northern skirt.

If I'm unlucky they will give me some off the wall routing... but I think this plan stays clear of all 3 major departure and arrival routes so it may work.

If its a 3k layer i could fly under vfr the whole way too...
Click to expand...

Make sure getting 500 feet below the clouds still allows you to remain 1000agl, as prescribed by 14 CFR 91.119(b). Overwise, ask for a SVFR clearance (you have to ask, they can't offer or suggest it) as I mentioned previously in this thread and just remain clear of clouds.
 
When I was IR training we would fly the approach into Hayward then break off when VFR to Palo Alto. Common practice in y2k pre GPS approaches
 
I did the flight this morning. ATC cleared me to Moffett, gave me a clearance full of radials nothing even close to what I filed then gave me vectors once airborne. When I was with the approach controller he asked me what my intentions were and he told me he had a gap in San Jose arrivals if I wanted the San Jose ILS. Once I was below the deck I cancelled IFR and he told me to enter the Class D airspace and told me he would hand me off on the downwind. It worked remarkably better than I expected. Apparently the two airports works closely with each other.
I wasn't able to depart until SJC arrivals cleared up.
 
Yeah, I got a 15 minute hold for release trying to get out of Reid IFR this morning. Then I got vectored most of the way to SJC VOR, which might explain it.
 
MAKG1 said:
Yeah, I got a 15 minute hold for release trying to get out of Reid IFR this morning. Then I got vectored most of the way to SJC VOR, which might explain it.
Click to expand...

Were you flying a PA46? Me and a PA46 waited about 15 minutes together this morning
 
TheGolfPilot said:
Were you flying a PA46? Me and a PA46 waited about 15 minutes together this morning
Click to expand...

Don't I wish.....

Instrument lesson in a 172.

I think just about everyone waited for purple 737s today. And a whole bunch of primary students in the pattern under the 2000 foot overcast.
 
Last edited:
We used to do so regularly as the home field was uncontrolled with no approaches so we would file to thennearby Class D (KHTS) and put "Destination HTW" in Comments. Once we broke out, cancel IFR and head home. ATC gets used to it, you won't be the first to do so. Putting it in Comments will help them expect it.

Since it's a small area, ATC knew us and our home field. We did this regardless of flight direction or breakout altitude, as long as we were high enoug. Low ceiling meant landing there and bumming a ride. It was 4nm by air, but 15 minutes by car due to the Ohio River in between.
 
TheGolfPilot said:
For example. I want to go to Reid-hillview (krhv) airport but the weather is 1,500 overcast and my plane is /A. How upset would ATC be with me if I filed to San Jose airport, cancelled IFR 500' below the overcast, and mozied over to hillview? What would be the correct way to explain what I am doing? Would they likely make it easy for me or be difficult? Anybody have any experience with something like this?
Click to expand...

There's no reason ATC should be upset about this, but you can't cancel IFR under these conditions and proceed VFR to KRHV. 500' below the overcast with a 1500' ceiling puts you 1000' above the ground, but you have to be at least 1000' above the highest obstacle within a horizontal radius of 2,000 feet of the aircraft. Since the Class C and Class D surface areas abut, canceling IFR and proceeding on a SVFR clearance to KRHV is a possibility.
 
roncachamp said:
There's no reason ATC should be upset about this, but you can't cancel IFR under these conditions and proceed VFR to KRHV. 500' below the overcast with a 1500' ceiling puts you 1000' above the ground, but you have to be at least 1000' above the highest obstacle within a horizontal radius of 2,000 feet of the aircraft. Since the Class C and Class D surface areas abut, canceling IFR and proceeding on a SVFR clearance to KRHV is a possibility.
Click to expand...

"except when necessary for takeoff and landing" Hayward airport requires I believe a 800' pattern, oakland's traffic on one runway is 600'. That being the case being in the pattern to land would legally fall under that clause. Breaking out from a 1500' layer on a class C approach and landing at a conjoining class D just as close or closer, you probably can fly below the MSA and be legal since it would be necessary to land.
 
TheGolfPilot said:
"except when necessary for takeoff and landing" Hayward airport requires I believe a 800' pattern, oakland's traffic on one runway is 600'. That being the case being in the pattern to land would legally fall under that clause. Breaking out from a 1500' layer on a class C approach and landing at a conjoining class D just as close or closer, you probably can fly below the MSA and be legal since it would be necessary to land.
Click to expand...

No. Travel between two airports is not "in the pattern to land".
 
roncachamp said:
No. Travel between two airports is not "in the pattern to land".
Click to expand...

The question is, What does the FAA consider to be the beginning of the "landing". Is it when you start your descent from cruise altitude? Or is it within a certain distance from an airport?

My point with the patterns is that there are published patterns well below the minimum 1000' requirement. Although a very short time, a plane in that pattern is technically in cruise on the downwind leg and is doing so below 1000'. Does their landing start when they reach cruise? Or does it start when it reaches the beginning of the descent? If the later, is that published pattern altitude illegal?
 
TheGolfPilot said:
The question is, What does the FAA consider to be the beginning of the "landing". Is it when you start your descent from cruise altitude? Or is it within a certain distance from an airport?

My point with the patterns is that there are published patterns well below the minimum 1000' requirement. Although a very short time, a plane in that pattern is technically in cruise on the downwind leg and is doing so below 1000'. Does their landing start when they reach cruise? Or does it start when it reaches the beginning of the descent? If the later, is that published pattern altitude illegal?
Click to expand...

Stop it.
 
TheGolfPilot said:
The question is, What does the FAA consider to be the beginning of the "landing". Is it when you start your descent from cruise altitude? Or is it within a certain distance from an airport?
Click to expand...
Neither or both.

You are not going to find a bright line that separates when a low altitude is "necessary for takeoff and landing." It's going to be a case-by-case determination based on all of the facts - the airport, the situation, the aircraft, the weather. As an example, an altitude over nearby houses that "necessary for takeoff" in an under-powered airplane when density altitude is high might be completely unnecessary in a helicopter on the same day and place.
 
midlifeflyer said:
As an aside, SVFR is problematic since SVFR requires you be "within the airspace contained by the upward extension of the lateral boundaries of the controlled airspace designated to the surface for an airport." IOW, within a area that is controlled airspace to the surface.
Click to expand...

It definitely requires some advance thought and planning... if the adjacent airspace is Class G below 700 or 1200 AGL, you can navigate clear of clouds to your nearby uncontrolled airport, while considering terrain, obstacles, and 14 CFR 91.119 congested/uncongested minimum safe altitudes.

That's sometimes a technique used here in the DFW area to get to 52F (Northwest Regional) or T67 (Hicks) after shooting an approach into Alliance Fort Worth (KAFW). Personally, I'd most often land at the airport with the approach versus slog it through low weather to a nearby airport a few hundred feet off the ground, unless visibility was stupendously good.
 
Visibility is often stupendously good under the marine layer.

However, it would take some serious meds to call downtown San Jose "uncongested."
 
TheGolfPilot said:
Its amazing how San Jose has changed
Click to expand...

I don't think downtown San Jose or SJSU would have been uncongested even in 1957. That's what you're looking at just beyond the airport.

Silicon Valley might be relatively new, but San Jose isn't. And in the 50s, it was beginning to sprawl.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top