Just got an E-Mail from Samedan through our company that they will establish IFR/GNSS approaches! Initially for the ski championships in February 2017 only, but they plan to turn it into a permanent solution as soon as possible. It is not on their website yet. I wonder what the qualifications required by pilots will be…
Cool! I hope the requirements are reasonable.
Unless they make it an RNP AR APCH, can they impose their own pilot qualification requirements for an RNAV or RNP approach?
Rwy20 wrote:
can they impose their own pilot qualification requirements for an RNAV or RNP approach?
They can (and do!) even impose their own regulations for a VFR approach. It is their airfield, they have had their fair share of incidents and accidents and they are free to make their own rules of how this airfield is to be used.
I know about the briefing and instructor flight requirements. But my point is that in RNP approaches, there is a defined way to say that an approach may not be flown by every qualified pilot/plane combination, and that is to make it an “RNP AR” (Authorization Required) approach. Without the AR bit, I don’t think they can write some additional requirements into the fine print, since these requirements are (for the plane) or will be (for the pilot) centrally regulated on the European level. If every airport now starts to impose different requirements for RNP approaches, it will become a mess.
If at all, I would also accord this authority to the FOCA as the responsible authority for the airspace, and not the airport. They can ask you everything they want, including that you have to wear pink underwear, once you are there. But (and you can see I liked that statement), they can’t tell you how to get there.
Rwy20 wrote:
Without the AR bit,…
Well, an ILS does not have an “AR” bit either, yet quite a few airports (eg. LSZA, Lugano or EGLC, London City) require special qualification and authorisation to fly it.
NB: Or Buochs, LSZC, has a “normal” RNAV (GNSS) approach plate (no “AR” anywhere) which somewhere in the diagram has a caption “Procedure limited to pilots operating for Pilatus Aircraft Ltd.”
Just came back from the trip yesterday and all went well. The weather and scenery was simply amazing!
We followed one of the northern routes via Bad Ragaz and Zernez towards RWY 21, joined the left hand traffic circuit (which was very tight), had to make a go around due to a glider that was a bit too close on final and then landed. All went well, airport staff was friendly. No questions asked about qualifications.
On departure we took off from RWY 21, turned north into another valley just after the FIZ and flew all the way to Stockholm from Samedan, 4:40 hrs in the Cirrus at FL220. No one dared to even take a zip of water during the entire flight. ;)
All in all a great trip, lovely scenery and great ATC. Airport fees were high as expected though.
The most unexpected highlight of the trip was to see the Breitling Super Constellation land at Samedan:
I noticed there was a lot of people at the airport and as I was refueling I looked up to see this beauty on final and just saw the landing. So nice!
In post #60, the answer from Samedan to Fly310 included:
4. Do you have any published departure minima for weather?
Approach Cat A: 1.5 km visibility; Cloud Base: 500 ft GND; Approach Cat. B: 5.0 km visibility; Cloud Base 2200 ft GND
This has a “gotcha” in that IFR (& flight in IMC) is not allowed (i.e. is illegal) in Switzerland in class G airspace, which goes up to 2’000 AGL. So in reality the departure minimum cloud base for Cat A is nearly as high as for Cat B. There are efforts underway to get the class G airspace prohibition removed (pushed in particular by emergency/medical helicopter operators), but for the moment that is still the rule.
Glad you had such a good trip! Samedan is a lovely airport and if being an FI meant that you were able to get in with just the online briefing that’s not so bad.
Reviewing all the airports listed in this chain with special requirements for use just confirms the difference in approach between Europe and North America where the responsibility is on the pilot to inform him/herself about any individual airport specifics be they density altitude, surrounding terrain, steep glide path, etc, etc and set personal minimums accordingly. My concern is the creeping tendency in Europe for individual airports (with or without prodding from the national authorities) to feel that they have local specifics requiring special pilot training/authorization and thereby remove authority from the PIC. The result is evident in a lot of European pilots who don’t have an ingrained feeling of PIC responsibility for a flight. But that also goes beyond the field of aviation….
