Airborne_Again wrote:
How do you do a cloud break down to 700 ft without an IAP? (Regulation-wise I mean.)
It’s a bit a grey area, but IFR in Class G airspace is allowed in The Netherlands so regulation-wise there is no problem.
lenthamen wrote:
It’s a bit a grey area, but IFR in Class G airspace is allowed in The Netherlands so regulation-wise there is no problem.
IFR minimum altitudes are not affected by the airspace class!
You can’t legally descent below the enroute minimum altitude unless you are on an IAP. Do the Netherlands permit DIY approaches for private flights like the UK?
Airborne_Again wrote:
You can’t legally descent below the enroute minimum altitude unless you are on an IAP.
The “IAP” bit is not what the regulation (SERA) says. It says “other than for departure and approach for landing”.
DavidC wrote:
I suppose it’s quite valid to ask Schiphol to vector you with a cloudbreak down to 1000 feet from which you can proceed visually. Since the minima is 700 feet it doesn’t make that much difference.
I suspect Schiphol Approach will only issue vectors down to 1500ft, being the base of their airspace
Peter_Mundy wrote:
I suspect Schiphol Approach will only issue vectors down to 1500ft, being the base of their airspace
Would Schiphol provide a deconfliction service (sorry I meant Radar Control Service) outside their controlled airspace to ensure traffic deconfliction in cloud instead?
I’m assuming that Lelystad Tower wouldn’t have radar and couldn’t provide that service in their locality.
DavidC wrote:
Would Schiphol provide a deconfliction service (sorry I meant Radar Control Service) outside their controlled airspace to ensure traffic deconfliction in cloud instead?
Schiphol will urge you to cancel IFR when you reach 1500ft.
If you arrive from the North / East / South-East you will be with Dutchmil Radar and they are quite helpful with traffic info.
I would advice against flying into Lelystad in marginal weather conditions if you’re unfamiliar with the area.
achimha wrote:
The “IAP” bit is not what the regulation (SERA) says. It says “other than for departure and approach for landing”.
Indeed, but there are rules for approaches and departures as well, which are typically found in the operational rules. For instance EU-OPS requires CAT to use approved IAPs (CAT.OP.MPA.125 (a) and (c)). Part-NCO is vague – it doesn’t explicitly say that IAPs have to be approved, but it is formulated in a way that tacitly assumes that they are.
(Example: NCO.OP.110 (a) says: For instrument flight rules (IFR) flights, the pilot-in-command shall select and use aerodrome operating minima for each departure, destination and alternate aerodrome. Such minima shall: (1) not be lower than those established by the State in which the aerodrome is located, except when specifically approved by that State…)
Of course part-NCO is not yet in force, so national regulations apply. AFAIK the UK is unique in accepting DIY approaches for private flights, but I could of course be mistaken.
