From here
UdoR wrote:
Is it true that there is no minimum altitude for microlight in Spain? Shortly after the cloud breaking descent they tell this openly and make a very low level flight over Mallorca. Isn’t that SERA ? 150m over water and open land..
@UdoR, I think the rule was 500ft from any person, building, vehicle and vessel. But, as it is impossible to ensure that there is not such thing underneath, it is usually treated as “not below 500ft AGL”.
I think the rule was 500ft from any person, building, vehicle and vessel. But, as it is impossible to ensure that there is not such thing underneath, it is usually treated as “not below 500ft AGL”.
That is only in UK?? in Spain & France, it’s hard rule of min(500ft AGL, 500ft from X) in cruise (there are additional rules over towns)
Why we are talking about “500ft rule” in case of an arrival ? you are allowed to go to go under 500ft for the purpose of landing? (I think “arrival phase” of flight officially starts 25nm around your destination, there is no explicit rule stating this but it’s a good proxy for those who want relaxed rules, for those who like tight rules, the “arrival phase” starts in 2nm short final when passing under circuit height and only when landing threshold is positively identified and no traffic is sitting on the runway, only then a landing as N#1 is guaranteed)
Reference please
It’s my personal opinion “25nm radius around ARP”, I think the other extreme is “2nm final” (or ATZ), AFAIK, no one has a legal definition when cruise stops and landing starts? including in UK…
Can you get busted for it? Probably not, not least because they can’t prove the date+time.
What if they were on VFR clearance inside controlled airspace (radio audio) while in IMC?
The rest can’t be policed, especially OCAS
Ibra wrote:
you are allowed to go to go under 500ft for the purpose of landing?
SERA actually says when necessary for take-off and landing. We could probably debate endlessly when exactly it is necessary, but certainly not 25 NM out.
SERA actually says when necessary for take-off and landing. We could probably debate endlessly when exactly it is necessary, but certainly not 25 NM out
What about those published departure procedures that stretch for 25nm (or 30nm) and keeps you under arriving traffic? on what legal basis they can allow flying under min cruise altitudes?
Cloud-break into a hole under VFR at X then flying under clouds VFR to land at Y is called necessary , it is allowed by SERA (how far X & Y is up to interpretation and personal views, it can be 2nm or 30nm)
Ibra wrote:
Cloud-break into a hole under VFR at X then flying under clouds VFR to land at Y is called necessary , it is allowed by SERA (how far X & Y is up to interpretation and personal views, it can be 2nm or 30nm)
That depends on what you mean by “necessary”. I interpret the SERA provision to mean “necessary to achieve a landing”, while your interpretation is “necessary to reach the particular airport in the particular weather situation.” Those interpretations are not the same…
You can surely opt for another extreme interpretation: you can descend bellow “500ft from X” for landing only when under 2nm short final with stable approach and threshold positively identified and clear runway as N#1 and after you have ensured that you have the required legal visibility to land on that runway to be able to go bellow the runway gate 
Otherwise, it’s not necessary to descend to acheive a landing…
I cannot decipher the above proposition. No, please don’t make yet another post… you are already at 50% of the total post count!
No, please don’t make yet another post… you are already at 50% of the total post count!
Which one of two of them?
In the US, there is an FAA general counsel opinion that indicates flight in the pattern qualifies as necessary for takeoff or landing.
