Didn’t start in Rotterdam yet, I had that planned for this spring, but a cracked airfilterhousing and a defective starter slowed me down somewhat. First I need to dust of my skills again and then I’ll plan a meeting with the head of training at EHRD.
Today I flew to EHGG VFR and asked If I could fly a few approaches. Do you wan’t to switch to IFR? ‘Unable’ I had to reply. ‘No problem’ they said. ‘You want vectors’? It never occured to me untill recently that you can fly IFR procedures VFR if you stick to the VFR minima, it shouldn’t be a problem. I’m glad to know this.
I have about 25 hrs IFR instruction now, and It’s been good sofar.
It never occured to me untill recently that you can fly IFR procedures VFR if you stick to the VFR minima
I am sure that is not universal. See e.g. here and here. For sure, there are many airports in Europe where ATC will not allow a “VFR” flight (e.g. one on a VFR flight plan, but really any flight not on a Eurocontrol IFR flight plan) to fly the trajectory of an IAP and will instead force it to route via some VRP (various threads e.g. here). In summary, IMHO, IFR traffic is entitled to fly an IAP (with a Visual Approach option if applicable) while VFR traffic is entitled to nothing (except some joining procedure as per the published VAC (VFR approach chart) and this is the political quid pro quo which underpins access of VFR traffic to airports in CAS).
This is digressing but it worth a mention I think.
SERA.2005 Compliance with the rules of the air
The operation of an aircraft either in flight, on the movement area of an aerodrome or at an operating site shall be in compliance with the general rules, the applicable local provisions and, in addition, when in flight, either with:
(a) the visual flight rules; or
(b) the instrument flight rules.
You are either VFR or IFR there is no halfway house!
VFR is about visibility and distance to cloud. It’s perfectly legal to fly an instrument approach on a VFR FPL as long as you respect the VFR rules.
Last year I joined a pilot with an FAA IR. He had to practice some approaches in VMC with a safety pilot in order to keep his license current.
We went to EHGG on a VFR FPL and when contacting the Approach controller it was: Consider yourself IFR. Remain VMC. Fly heading 090. Etc.
I think this is a great opportunity for IR students to practice some approaches on their own in fair weather conditions…
Yes; this works fine in some countries and the UK is one of them. Actually, here, an OCAS (Class G) airport couldn’t care less what your flight conditions are, when you turn up and ask to fly their IAP 
However it is dodgy for ATC to issue headings to VFR traffic. Most won’t do it because a vector could send VFR traffic into IMC (or sub VFR conditions) and then everybody gets a load of trouble to deal with.
However it is dodgy for ATC to issue headings to VFR traffic. Most won’t do it because a vector could send VFR traffic into IMC (or sub VFR conditions) and then everybody gets a load of trouble to deal with.
True, but the same goes for assigned altitudes when flying in controlled airspace. And that happens very often.
For assigning a heading to VFR traffic, you often hear ATC “suggesting” headings in order to avoid liability 
I was wondering about that too, the vectors. Suggested heading would solve this, or own navigation. It’s nice to be able to practice in this way. I called Amsterdam FIS before the flight to discus the possibilties and they too said it would be possible as long as the VFR minima would be respected, it is a VFR flight. At Eelde they were very relaxed, I guess they welcome the extra traffic and the revenue it generates (as they should). They sure can use it. I paid around € 33,00 for two approaches, one touch an go and a full stop landing. Seems fair to me, very very GA friendly experience.
Bobo wrote:
Seems fair to me, very very GA friendly experience.
And there are people complaining that would be impossible in the Netherlands
BTW dankjewel for sharing these experiences, Bobo
Peter wrote:
However it is dodgy for ATC to issue headings to VFR traffic.
That is the first time I hear that opinion. I’ve been given headings and altitudes in controlled airspace as VFR traffic in many countries, such as France, Germany and Scotland. Always with the reminder “remain VMC”, and when it wasn’t possible on the assigned heading I have asked for a descent on some occasions and to deviate 10° for a short time on another occasion. It is really the same as IFR where I wouldn’t enter a TCU on a heading either, only that VFR I avoid any vector that doesn’t permit to remain in VMC. I don’t understand why that is “dodgy”?
