ILS 4 into KUIN - file to?

[Terry M - 3CK (Chicago)]

Looking back into the IR and refreshing some things. When you file to an airport do you include an IAF in case of lost communications?

If I were flying into Quincy IL from the NE and filed V586 to UIN (the VOR off the airport) how do I get on the approach if lost comms?

Take the R-082 radial to HEGUL and fly the DME Arc?

 

[flyingron]

What do you have for navigation al equipment on board? You can go to UIN to UI and start the approach there, if you have VOR and can either receive the beacon or have an ADF. With GPS, you could just pick one of the arc IAFs.

 

[luvflyin]

What kind of equipment do I have? RNAV?

 

[Terry M - 3CK (Chicago)]

@flyingron There is a 430 for #1 and a kx155 with dme, I think, for #2. ADF was removed.

It’s a rental. Used to have 2 Kx 155s with DME. Maybe they pulled the DME when they swapped in the 430.

When I was doing my IR training the plane didn’t have a gps.

 

[N1120A]

The whole "file to an IAF" thing is overplayed. As @flyingron said in the thread below, what do you do if you're in IMC when you reach that fix? You are cleared to the airport, not the fix, so do you fly to the airport and fly back? No. If you are lost comms, you fly to the final fix on your route before the airport, then to an IAF from that fix, at a legal altitude, and begin the approach.

https://www.pilotsofamerica.com/com...he airport,though it's not strictly necessary.

 

[midlifeflyer]

I don't consider lost com in my planning. I know how to parrot the rule if tested.

But I also know a few other things about the 21st Century.

• The lost com rules were created in an era of vacuum tubes in radios and limited radar coverage, not to mention only one radio in the cockpit. In the 21st century, if I have pilot-side lost com, 90% odds it's an emergency. At best I've probably lost NAV capability also. It might, of course be the smell of something burning or the start of a complete electrical failure. I'm not stickling around to find out.
• The weather has to be so bad that I never encounter visual conditions after losing com before any rule other than "remain visual" applies.
• Once ATC is aware I am incommunicato, they will keep traffic away from me until I am on the ground. So my real choices are to tie up airspace from my present position all the way to the destination by following the rules to the letter or get the heck down in the most reasonably safe manner I can.
• The very first sentence of the AIM lost com discussion, and my absolute favorite statement in the whole AIM): "It is virtually impossible to provide regulations and procedures applicable to all possible situations associated with two-way radio communications failure. During two-way radio communications failure, when confronted by a situation not covered in the regulation, pilots are expected to exercise good judgment in whatever action they elect to take. Should the situation so dictate they should not be reluctant to use the emergency action contained in 14 CFR Section 91.3(b)."

There may be other reasons for filing an IAF. For example, your direction of flight would make a certain IAF on a TAA RNAV approach very convenient. Why not file to it if it shortens your route? I think that's the reason Gary Reeves recommends the practice and having gotten a "where is that?" when asking for a shortcut to an IAF, there's some merit to it.

 

[midlifeflyer]

The whole "file to an IAF" thing is overplayed. As @flyingron said in the thread below, what do you do if you're in IMC when you reach that fix? You are cleared to the airport, not the fix, so do you fly to the airport and fly back? No. If you are lost comms, you fly to the final fix on your route before the airport, then to an IAF from that fix, at a legal altitude, and begin the approach.

https://www.pilotsofamerica.com/community/threads/ifr-file-to-iaf-or-airport.109936/#:~:text=You file to the airport,though it's not strictly necessary.

Here's something weird - fly to the airport and back to an IAF is exactly what the rule means according to the Chief Counsel. Now, how you manage to get direct to the airport to begin with without RNAV is a mystery to me. Best example of how out of touch the rule is with reality.

 

[Jim K]

When you file to an airport do you include an IAF in case of lost communications?

Not any more. I used to worry a lot about filing airways and iaf's....these days, right or wrong, it's usually just DCT.

If I were flying into Quincy IL from the NE and filed V586 to UIN (the VOR off the airport) how do I get on the approach if lost comms?

Take the R-082 radial to HEGUL and fly the DME Arc?

That's as good as any if that's the approach favored by the winds, and you still have functioning equipment to fly it. I would probably join the localizer outbound and fly the procedure turn as it's a heckuva lot easier and ties up the airspace for less time.

 

[N1120A]

Here's something weird - fly to the airport and back to an IAF is exactly what the rule means according to the Chief Counsel. Now, how you manage to get direct to the airport to begin with without RNAV is a mystery to me. Best example of how out of touch the rule is with reality.

And that makes absolutely zero sense - especially where that letter came out of. The TEC routes in that terminal area, and the cross country clearances you get from outside the area, nearly always take you to an IAF or a fix/VOR that defines part of an IAF.

I'm pretty sure no one can lose comms and not break a regulation, just depending on who is the one reading the regulation.

 

[midlifeflyer]

And that makes absolutely zero sense - especially where that letter came out of. The TEC routes in that terminal area, and the cross country clearances you get from outside the area, nearly always take you to an IAF or a fix/VOR that defines part of an IAF.

The first time I read it, I laughed. Then I emailed the guy and told him it was the answer he should have expected.

Fortunately, I think you'd have to do something pretty moronic to get violated. Unfortunately, doing something moronic is not out of the question. Fortunately most of the moronic things involve treating something as lost com when it's not, so it's another rule that will be violated.

 

[N1120A]

The first time I read it, I laughed. Then I emailed the guy and told him it was the answer he should have expected.

Fortunately, I think you'd have to do something pretty moronic to get violated. Unfortunately, doing something moronic is not out of the question. Fortunately most of the moronic things involve treating something as lost com when it's not, so it's another rule that will be violated.

Yeah, no one is going to violate someone who legit lost comms, or even inadvertently lost comms and shows they learned from it.

Still, there is no reason to be clear as mud about these issues - especially in the MON/RNAV era.

 

[NealRomeoGolf]

I did the UIN ILS 4 for my IR checkride. Luckily it was vectors to final for me. Fly the DME arc. It's more fun.

 

[midlifeflyer]

Yeah, no one is going to violate someone who legit lost comms, or even inadvertently lost comms and shows they learned from it.

Still, there is no reason to be clear as mud about these issues - especially in the MON/RNAV era.

That's why the AIM's first paragraph reads that way.

Never mind MON/RNAV. How about FIS-B and TIS-B? We can "see" the safest route.

 

[flyingron]

The quote linked was taken out of context slightly here. The article in the other thread said you should file with your DESTINATION as an IAF for an approach. That is completely stupid and I don't know anybody who does it and I can imagine the headscratching the controller relaying the clearance would give. I've never heard an initial clearance that didn't end at the destination.

The other lost comms argument I make that if the destination is indeed your CLEARANCE LIMIT then none of that "leave the fix at the ETA" stuff applies. ATC is expecting you to go to the limit unless they've amended you a limit short of it.

 

[Jim K]

I did the UIN ILS 4 for my IR checkride. Luckily it was vectors to final for me. Fly the DME arc. It's more fun.

I flew CMI's VOR22 Arc the other day in a 30 knot wind. It looked more like a square corner on flightaware, but I stayed within a mile...and it WAS fun...sort of

 

[Walboy]

Now, how you manage to get direct to the airport to begin with without RNAV is a mystery to me.

I've thought about this too and concluded that when the rule was written, a NDB or VOR located on the field was pretty commonplace. Especially a NDB.

 

[N1120A]

I did the UIN ILS 4 for my IR checkride. Luckily it was vectors to final for me. Fly the DME arc. It's more fun.

I flew the DME arc on the VOR approach to KPRB on my long IFR cross-country. My instructor made me turn the GPS to the DME page and fly it the old fashioned way, on green needles. That was "fun."

That's why the AIM's first paragraph reads that way.

Never mind MON/RNAV. How about FIS-B and TIS-B? We can "see" the safest route.

Eh, it is ATC's job to move traffic for us in lost comms. That won't be a consideration.

 

[Clip4]

Not any more. I used to worry a lot about filing airways and iaf's....these days, right or wrong, it's usually just DCT.

That's as good as any if that's the approach favored by the winds, and you still have functioning equipment to fly it. I would probably join the localizer outbound and fly the procedure turn as it's a heckuva lot easier and ties up the airspace for less time.

I use airways and IAFs when I can.

 

[luvflyin]

The whole "file to an IAF" thing is overplayed. As @flyingron said in the thread below, what do you do if you're in IMC when you reach that fix? You are cleared to the airport, not the fix, so do you fly to the airport and fly back? No. If you are lost comms, you fly to the final fix on your route before the airport, then to an IAF from that fix, at a legal altitude, and begin the approach.

https://www.pilotsofamerica.com/community/threads/ifr-file-to-iaf-or-airport.109936/#:~:text=You file to the airport,though it's not strictly necessary.

if your Clearance Limit was the Airport it would indeed be strange to fly to it and then back to a Fix. One decision you would have to make is do you do a Touch and Go, Stop and Go or land and then depart.

 

[luvflyin]

Here's something weird - fly to the airport and back to an IAF is exactly what the rule means according to the Chief Counsel. Now, how you manage to get direct to the airport to begin with without RNAV is a mystery to me. Best example of how out of touch the rule is with reality.

That's one of the ones that inspired my signature.

 

[midlifeflyer]

I use airways and IAFs when I can.

I file based on what I see for routes recently cleared by ATC. Sometimes airways sometimes not. I don't care. I'm agnostic.

 

[Clip4]

I file based on what I see for routes recently cleared by ATC. Sometimes airways sometimes not. I don't care. I'm agnostic.

When I fly XC, I go to places that ATC does not routinely route to.

 

[midlifeflyer]

When I fly XC, I go to places that ATC does not routinely route to.

Yes. That happens a lot. Recently cleared routes only exist for routes recently cleared And there may simply have been none or too few/old from my home base to come up. But even then, I usually choose an airport on a direct route where I figure there will be some activity and use it as a planning tool. I sometimes do that even with a recently cleared route if I don't like it. "Recently cleared" might simply mean someone else's planned route was NAS-acceptable. Maybe I can do better. Maybe not.

Yes, I could simply use departure to destination airway routing (or just file direct and let the computer decide) but my method has worked pretty well in terms of getting accepted by the computer, having most of not all cleared "as filed", and being flown with minimal reroutes. Nice when you discover that your airport to the planning changeover then to the destination results in Direct - Direct. And maybe airways would be easier but I find this kind of planning a fun exercise.

BTW, the AIM planning recommendation I do follow is a waypoint in each Center.

 

[Jim K]

Part of it of course is where you are in the country. Here in the midwest unless you are going near the ORD bravo "DCT" always results in "cleared as filed", and that's what most of the previously cleared routes show as well. Certainly to UIN lol.

Even since I started my instrument a year & a half ago, several vor's have been removed in the area making airway routing less convenient, which is only going to continue.

 

[jordane93]

I’ve never filed to the IAF. In fact, I’ve only ever heard of people on here filing to the IAF

 

[midlifeflyer]

I’ve never filed to the IAF. In fact, I’ve only ever heard of people on here filing to the IAF

It is much more widespread than POA with some nationally-recognized instructors advocating it as a good routing choice independent of the lost com thing. Or maybe you see it here because POA is National (at least) in scope so we get to, learn from others with different experience.

I haven't done it with intent (yet) but I can't say I never have. I typically (but not always) adopt sensible previously-cleared routes and they sometimes include an IAF or other approach transition.

WEKAG in the highlighted route is an IAF for the RNAV 23 approach. For a number of reason, I would not file it but turn the winds around and I might file GRECI, the better T IAF for the RNAV 5 if the weather conditions were such that it was likely I would need to fly an approach. Can't speak to the radar-vector-intensive northeast but around these parts some controllers are beginning to like the idea of sending us to an RNAV transition and lessening their workload to focus on higher priorities.



I've also come across two common routings which are similar except for different IAF which is apparently due to wind direction.

 

[coma24]

Your route of flight overflies an IAF for the RNAV RWY 22, ALUGE.

For planning purposes, I'd go with that and call it a day.

 

[flyingron]

Putting an IAF into the route is distinct from the silly suggestion of putting it in as the destination.

 

[midlifeflyer]

Putting an IAF into the route is distinct from the silly suggestion of putting it in as the destination.

Did someone actually suggest that?

 

[NealRomeoGolf]

I’ve never filed to the IAF. In fact, I’ve only ever heard of people on here filing to the IAF

I do it sometimes. My DPE liked it.

 

[flyingron]

Did someone actually suggest that?

Yes, the thread that the post of mine was a response to someone who did suggest that.

 

[midlifeflyer]

Yes, the thread that the post of mine was a response to someone who did suggest that.

That's amazing.

 

[Terry M - 3CK (Chicago)]

Putting an IAF into the route is distinct from the silly suggestion of putting it in as the destination.

If I suggested that it was a lingo barrier on my end. I just meant including the IAF in my filed route to the airport. (I didn’t mean to actually file to the IAF as the clearance limit - but I don’t actually understand the implications of that at this point. Then I’m not cleared to the airport, right? I would just hold at that last fix? (Not in reality)).

 

[flyingron]

Without lost comms you hope ATC figures out and clears you to the approach (or asks).
With lost comms you start the approach per the regs at the EFC/ETA.

 

[Tokirbymd]

I have put in the IAF as the fix before my destination airport in an attempt to "plan" the approach from there. However, center had no idea what the IAF was for the broadcast approach and cleared my direct to destination, then when I contacted approach, was told to go back to the IAF fix. So, double the work.

 

[luvflyin]

If I suggested that it was a lingo barrier on my end. I just meant including the IAF in my filed route to the airport. (I didn’t mean to actually file to the IAF as the clearance limit - but I don’t actually understand the implications of that at this point. Then I’m not cleared to the airport, right? I would just hold at that last fix? (Not in reality)).

You can't have two different Clearance Limits at the same time. If you got a Fix, you may or may not hold there. ATC is supposed either clear you beyond the fix or give you holding instructions, with an EFC, 5 minutes before get there. Read AIM 5-3-8. It starts with this, but keep reading, there's some more pertinent stuff you should know about this.

a. Whenever an aircraft is cleared to a fix other than the destination airport and delay is expected, it is the responsibility of ATC to issue complete holding instructions (unless the pattern is charted), an EFC time and best estimate of any additional en route/terminal delay.

 

[mandm]

When I file IFR, I usually pick a few points on departure then direct to the destination airport. It really doesn’t matter what you pick because ATC is going to give you what they want to.

In the event of lost comms, in visual conditions you should land. In IMC conditions, continue at the higher of your altitudes authorized to the cleared destination to include landing. This is I guess where it can get tricky as I remember the regulations stated you could continue along your planned flight path and actually land but most pilots say you should just land whenever possible. If one thing is not working in the air, if something else fails it can quickly add to your workload and stress levels.

 

[mandm]

You can't have two different Clearance Limits at the same time. If you got a Fix, you may or may not hold there. ATC is supposed either clear you beyond the fix or give you holding instructions, with an EFC, 5 minutes before get there. Read AIM 5-3-8. It starts with this, but keep reading, there's some more pertinent stuff you should know about this.

a. Whenever an aircraft is cleared to a fix other than the destination airport and delay is expected, it is the responsibility of ATC to issue complete holding instructions (unless the pattern is charted), an EFC time and best estimate of any additional en route/terminal delay.

I guess if you file to the IAF then that’s where your clearance would be given? It’s better to file to the airport then so you are cleared to land.

 

[noahfong]

I guess if you file to the IAF then that’s where your clearance would be given? It’s better to file to the airport then so you are cleared to land.

I Don't think anyone files to an iaf even though they say it. Not what they meant. They file to the airport with the iaf as a waypoint. Makes a lot of sense.

What downside does this have? Gives flexibility for lost comms... And if atc vectors, so what?

 

[luvflyin]

I guess if you file to the IAF then that’s where your clearance would be given? It’s better to file to the airport then so you are cleared to land.

What you file has nothing to do with this. It's not common to get 'cleared short' to a Fix. If it happens it will usually happen long after you got your first clearance before departing and getting closer to destination and they have some need to hold airplanes. Unless you just wanted a climb to OTP to cancel. You'll get a Clearance to some nearby Fix or Navaid for that.