Flight Plan Confusion

[snoopyloopy]

I'm confused about something that I experienced on last evening. I was a passenger on this flight between KDEN and KMLI. Everything was dandy until we were basically on approach into KMLI. We descended at what seemed to be normal, then suddenly we were going around. And around. And. Around. And all over the place. Everywhere except onto the ground. In all, it ended up being about half an hour of circling just south of the Quad Cities. Annoying to say the least.

My question comes from the reasoning behind this fiasco. The pilot came over the intercom and informed us that the tower was closed for the night (as opposed to just asleep) and that the previous flight had not closed their flight plan. Therefore, the airport was technically not released for our landing. I'm confused as to how that could be so. From my fuzzy memories of ground school, once a towered airport is untowered, it is then uncontrolled airspace and a flight plan cannot exist in uncontrolled. Am I missing something or was the pilot just pulling our leg?

 

[MAKG1]

The AIRPORT is uncontrolled. The airspace, even down to the surface, is not. If the approach is occupied, you can't use it. That's how you keep airplanes from banging into each other in instrument conditions.

Tower controls the runways, not approaches.

I'll bet the flight crew was pretty ticked off as well.

 

[LDJones]

When the tower is operating they close the IFR flight plan and release the airspace. When closed, the airspace remains closed until the pilot gets ahold of ATC and let's them know he's on the ground.

 

[JHW]

easy enough to cancel IFR and go ahead and land VFR, unless you're trying to make an obnoxious point about needing control towers

 

[Everskyward]

I think you will see more of this happening now that towers are going away. Sometimes there is a delay in the proper party getting the cancellation and sometimes it gets lost in the system.

I had this happen once. We landed at an uncontrolled airport and canceled on the phone with FSS but somehow the cancelation never got to center. I got a phone call from the office looking for us since that is the number I use on the flight plan. There was also an airplane following us. Luckily one of the passengers of the second airplane knew the cell phone number of one of the passengers on our airplane so they got conformation that our airplane had landed safely and were able to get ATC to clear them for the approach. However, I think they had to hold for some time until things were straightened out.

 

[Everskyward]

easy enough to cancel IFR and go ahead and land VFR, unless you're trying to make an obnoxious point about needing control towers

Not if it's IMC.

 

[roncachamp]

I'm confused about something that I experienced on last evening. I was a passenger on this flight between KDEN and KMLI. Everything was dandy until we were basically on approach into KMLI. We descended at what seemed to be normal, then suddenly we were going around. And around. And. Around. And all over the place. Everywhere except onto the ground. In all, it ended up being about half an hour of circling just south of the Quad Cities. Annoying to say the least.

My question comes from the reasoning behind this fiasco. The pilot came over the intercom and informed us that the tower was closed for the night (as opposed to just asleep) and that the previous flight had not closed their flight plan. Therefore, the airport was technically not released for our landing. I'm confused as to how that could be so. From my fuzzy memories of ground school, once a towered airport is untowered, it is then uncontrolled airspace and a flight plan cannot exist in uncontrolled. Am I missing something or was the pilot just pulling our leg?

When Quad City tower closes KMLI becomes an uncontrolled airport, the Class C surface area becomes Class E, still controlled airspace. Approach clearance for your flight had to await IFR cancellation of the previous flight as there is no other way to provide the required separation between IFR aircraft in controlled airspace.

 

[roncachamp]

When the tower is operating they close the IFR flight plan and release the airspace.

Well, not really, they provide IFR separation. Multiple aircraft can be cleared for approach when the tower is open. When aircraft land at a towered field no action needs to be taken by the tower as the aircraft has safely arrived at the clearance limit.

 

[roncachamp]

easy enough to cancel IFR and go ahead and land VFR, unless you're trying to make an obnoxious point about needing control towers

Not so easy in less than minimum VFR conditions.

 

[roncachamp]

I think you will see more of this happening now that towers are going away. Sometimes there is a delay in the proper party getting the cancellation and sometimes it gets lost in the system.

I had this happen once. We landed at an uncontrolled airport and canceled on the phone with FSS but somehow the cancelation never got to center. I got a phone call from the office looking for us since that is the number I use on the flight plan. There was also an airplane following us. Luckily one of the passengers of the second airplane knew the cell phone number of one of the passengers on our airplane so they got conformation that our airplane had landed safely and were able to get ATC to clear them for the approach. However, I think they had to hold for some time until things were straightened out.

In this situation it's been common practice for years to instruct the first aircraft to cancel through the aircraft awaiting approach clearance. That may not even be necessary here, as the 118.75 RCAG is at MLI, but it's not clear if that's the airport or the VOR.

 

[Everskyward]

In this situation it's been common practice for years to instruct the first aircraft to cancel through the aircraft awaiting approach clearance. That may not even be necessary here, as the 118.75 RCAG is at MLI, but it's not clear if that's the airport or the VOR.

We didn't know there was a second aircraft. They were further behind than just a few minutes.

 

[roncachamp]

We didn't know there was a second aircraft. They were further behind than just a few minutes.

Unless the OP was lied to about the reason for the delay we do know there was a second aircraft, it's the aircraft he was aboard.

 

[Everskyward]

Unless the OP was lied to about the reason for the delay we do know there was a second aircraft, it's the aircraft he was aboard.

I meant in our situation. Sorry for the confusion.

 

[taters]

Not so easy in less than minimum VFR conditions.

needs to be in the OPSPECS of the airline...if you were on the one I fly for into MLI..we can do cancel in VFR, Sqk1200 and get on the van.

 

[LDJones]

Well, not really, they provide IFR separation. Multiple aircraft can be cleared for approach when the tower is open. When aircraft land at a towered field no action needs to be taken by the tower as the aircraft has safely arrived at the clearance limit.

How does that fact get communicated to the ATC system? What if they went missed?

 

[MAKG1]

easy enough to cancel IFR and go ahead and land VFR, unless you're trying to make an obnoxious point about needing control towers

Or if the conditions are below VFR minimums, or if landing VFR violates the Part 121 OpsSpec (as is rather likely).

 

[roncachamp]

needs to be in the OPSPECS of the airline...if you were on the one I fly for into MLI..we can do cancel in VFR, Sqk1200 and get on the van.

I don't think so. I'm pretty sure it's illegal to cancel IFR in less than minimum VFR conditions without regard to any airline OPSPECS.

 

[roncachamp]

How does that fact get communicated to the ATC system?

Most often visually. It's communicated to the ATC system when the tower controller sees the aircraft land. In poor visibility it might require the aircraft reporting clear of the runway.

What if they went missed?

The tower controller would tell the aircraft to call departure/center.