Transitioning from IFR to VFR

Interesting. I wonder whether they would have done the same on an official procedure.

Sure, who hasn't? - But performing a "look-and-see" approach into some international airport with current CAT III conditions when I'm only approved for CAT I at least guarantees me sufficient obstacle clearance down to the last foot, no other traffic in range and proper approach lights that cannot easily be confused with road lights. And still a lot of accidents have happened during official procedures, which (for me!) means that unofficial procedures must be even more dangerous.

To be honest, I have been flying to grass strips with the cloud base at 300 feet. I don't think that was wise to do, so I don't do it anymore. However, it was in a Cirrys with synthetic vision and with my own approach made and another pilot checking the minima and obstacles. Any (non)precision approach I always fly right to the minima and I don't put my personal minima higher than the state minima. I don't see the use why I would leave a stable approach and go missed at e.g. a 400 feet height with the DH at 200 ft. If I don't see the runway environment at 200 feet I go missed and I actually plan each approach expecting to go missed, except when the weather is very good and I see the runway already visually at e.g. 800 feet.

Interesting. I wonder whether they would have done the same on an official procedure.

Or, maybe, having ventured into the grey/black area of own procedures, they were on a slippery slope...

In my personal opinion, this is a lot safer than making it up as you go along - unprepared "YMC" flight is what kills.

Agreed. But: The ones I mentioned above who perished during YMC flights all had their selfmade and well proven procedures. Worked well 99 times for each of them. The problem was that they kept lowering their minima. The procedure worked well down to 500ft, it should be okay for 400ft as well... and so on.

I am lucky enough to be based at an airfield with ILS, so I for one have none. In the UK, it is open to debate whether self-designed procedures are legal or not (i.e., are you taking off or landing in accordance with normal aviation practice, or not? Not been tested so far, AFAIK)

I have yet to talk to IFR pilots at an airfield with a local nav-aid that does not know the local, unofficial "procedure". Of course that procedure is only ever flown for "practice" in VMC. Or so they say.

As long as you design, document, and fly procedures to the same standards as the "proper" ones, they are safe [leaving separation from other non-existing traffic aside]. That is a lot of work, including drawing the full-scale deflection flight area on the map to determine safe altitudes, and setting a minimum that you then actually stick to. You also should draw a proper chart, and make at least one test flight.

Don't forget about the missed approach!!!

I know one pilot, who has a meticulous approach to all he does, who designed such an approach, and was a bit surprised about the descent gradients involved [ahead of the FAF], which he then fixed. Had he tried that one in IMC, it would have been interesting.

In my personal opinion, this is a lot safer than making it up as you go along - unprepared "YMC" flight is what kills.

I would make a big distinction between unsafe ("no no", for example descending below MSA in IMC without a procedure) and not legal (safely descending IFR down to MSA).

Thanks, the above and others clarify things. Seems if the weather is grey, the interpretation might be likewise. Clearly there are some basic common sense principles.

There simply is no terrain and when flying into e.g. Lelystad I have Schiphol sitting right next to me, so radar is pretty reliable. Well, no terrain. Of course there is terrain, but I mena that all is flat except for some obstacles, towers, windmills.

Since you seem to rely quite a bit on low altitude radar, how reliable does radar work below 1500' in the netherlands?

In switzerland there would probably be quite a lot of blind spots due to terrain below 1500' AGL

In NL you can fly IFR in uncontrolled airspace (G airspace), but it is uncommon and thus ATC will throw you out their system once you decent below 1500 feet. If the cloudbase is e.g. 800 feet at your destination, you would then decent further to below 800 in IMC conditions outside controlled airspace. In a way, you would not expect to find gliders there in the clouds or VFR only pilots, so I would consider it pretty safe to do and ATC can still give you information on traffic if you request to stay on their frequency. They indeed cannot tell if you are IMC or VMC but would probably have a clue if you ask them to report nearby traffic. Somehow, you are now in the grey world of Single Engine IFR flying and doing something that the ATC controller knows is probably not perfectly legal, but will still help out. After all, ATC is not the police.

In France (for example) I fly lots of time IFR in uncontrolled airspace and you can basically do what you want.