Hi Bob,

I’ve been reading a few of your forums on the Part 61 changes and I’m sort of confused when I got to both of the topics you previously spoke with user “Basketball” and “weirdguy99”.

In topic “Charter navaid alternate requirement” about 9 months & 1 week ago, you mentioned that AIP ENR 1.1 para 58.3.2 says that LSALT + 500 and 8 km vis is available only if the aerodrome 'IS NOT SERVED BY A NAVIGATION AID'.

But then in topic “NO AID AERDROME, ALTERNATE PLANNING”, you said AIP doesn't say you can use LSALT + 500 and 8k vis when the aerodrome has no AID. It says you can use it only when the aerodrome has “no INSTRUMENT APPROACH”.

So my question is, is it without an instrument approach or without a navigation aid that you then use the LSALT + 500ft and 8km visibility.

Here's the references on the topics I read from the forum.

Thanks


TOPIC: Charter navaid alternate requirement

That is correct. You cannot use a 129 GPS to satisfy the alternate requirements. For a charter flight you would have to have an alternate that would permit the use of LSALT + 500 and 8 km vis on the ARFOR. This is another example of how badly worded the AIP is. You would have to have an alternate that is not served by a navigation aid. AIP ENR 1.1 para 58.3.2 says that LSALT + 500 and 8 km vis is available only if the aerodrome 'IS NOT SERVED BY A NAVIGATION AID'. That means even on a day without a cloud in the sky, an aerodrome with an NDB approach would not be suitable as an alternate - you would have to look around for an aerodrome that 'IS NOT SERVED BY A NAVIGATION AID'. Don't think about it to much or you'll become just as cynical as I. Maybe you should all write to CASA about this crazy wording - I've already done that.

Bob

9 months & 1 week ago


TOPIC: NO AID AERODROME, ALTERNATE PLANNING

Trouble is the AIP doesn't say you can use LSALT + 500 and 8k vis when the aerodrome has no AID. It says you can use it only when the aerodrome has no INSTRUMENT APPROACH. An RNAV/GNSS is an instrument approach, so this aerodrome does have an instrument approach. The AIP says you cannot use the ARFOR for alternate planning unless the aerodrome has no INSTRUMENT APPROACH published. I know that's crazy but it is what the AIP says. I hear that some individual CASA FOIs have given opinions on this, but isn't it about time that someone amended the AIP to make it clear. I'm sure that you will find theory examiners keep away from this nonsense. Pilots all over Australia have been ignoring it for years. It means that, according to the AIP, you can never go to some homestead strip or any aerodrome without a TAF without an alternate - even in the middle of winter with a clear blue sky. Surely that was never the intention of the people who wrote it in the first place.

9 months & 2 weeks ago

It's just a matter of what the AIP actually says. The current wording of that paragraph is "an aerodrome which is not served by a navigation aid". I suppose it depends on your definition of a navigation aid. You might argue that an RNAV/GNSS approach is a navigation aid. The AIP used to say "an aerodrome with no published instrument approach". That makes more sense to me.

Thanks for last reply Bob.

I've also found some of these which could be useful for our discussion.

This is an up to date AIP downloaded from the Airservices website today.


ENR 1.10 - 1 (ENR 1.10 FLIGHT PLANNING)

1.2.FORECAST
1.2.1 An aerodrome forecast for the destination is also needed and, when required, the alternate aerodrome. For a flight to a destination for which a prescribed instrument approach procedure does not exist, the minimum requirement is an Area Forecast.

(MY UNDERSTANDING) This means that we need a TAF for the destination and also the ALTERNATE aerodrome (if there is one) and for a flight to a destination that does not have an (instrument approach), a minimum requirement is an AREA FORECAST.
That means that the minimum forecast requirement to a destination without an instrument approach is an AREA FORECAST.

Q: So what about a destination without an AID BUT has an instrument approach like RNAV? Can we still just carry an AREA FORECAST??

Q: TUMUT does not have an aid but has an instrument approach (RNAV) so is the minimum requirement still an area forecast??

Q: Lets say we select TUMUT has our alternate and the required ARFOR goes below the minima of the (500ft above LSALT & 8km vis).
We will then have to select another alternate right. If our nominated alternate doesn't have a TAF / instrument approach/an aid? It can still be the alternate providing we have the area forecast (minima is not below 500ft above LSALT & 8km vis). It says in the AIP, you can't nominate an alternate that requires an alternate.
I'm guessing that nominated alternate is good and doesn't require an alternate even if it doesn't have a TAF/without aid/without instrument approach?

Q: SO does that mean we never have to require a TAF in this case if we have an area forecast?? It’s good to have one obviously but seems like an AFVOR will cover the rules.


ENR 1.1 Pg 88

58. ALTERNATE AERDROMES

58.1.3 States that:

When an aerodrome forecast is not available or is “provisional”, the pilot in command must make provision for a suitable alternate that has a firm forecast

← Based on what I said and also what 58.1.3 says, it didn’t specify whether it’s a TAF/AFOR since there both forecast.

Q: If that’s the case, a pilot will never really have to have a TAF to nominate an alternate or even have one in the first place.

I found another reference that relates to your reply in ENR 1.1 pg 90. RADIO NAVIGATION AID.

58.3.2 Not with standing the above, a flight may be planned under the IFR by day to a destination aerodrome which is not served by a radio navigation aid without the requirement to provide for a suitable alternate aerodrome, provided that:

Not more than SCT cloud is forecast below the final route segment LSALT plus 500FT and forecast visibility at the destination aerodrome is not less than 8KM; and

Q: Does this mean we can go to a destination without an aid/instrument approach and without a TAF providing we just have an ARFOR?

It’s pretty confusing to be honest.

Hey Bob,

I've read it so many times and I've finally come down to this and I'm hoping you would agree with me.

In terms of relating "NO INSTRUMENT APPROACH/NO NAVIGATION AIDS)

Going to a destination with NO INSTRUMENT APPROACH - minimum forecast is (AREA FORECAST)
If carrying just an ARFOR, an Alternate is not required if AFVOR indicates not more than 4/8's below the ( LSALT + 500ft & not not less than 8km vis)
or meet the visual approach requirements.

Q: What about at Night? is it the same as the one below? if it is, sounds like whether you have an instrument approach/an aid is the same to me.

Going to a destination with NO NAVIGATION AIDS (DURING DAY ONLY) - minimum forecast is (AREA FORECAST)
Alternate is not required if AFVOR is better or above (500ft above LSALT + 8km vis) DURING DAY ONLY
Alternate is REQUIRED regardless AT NIGHT <-- whether it has an aid or not. Unless you meet the Visual approach requirements for night.

Hey Bob,

I've managed to find the answer to the question but please feel free to drop in your advise and explanation.

In JEPPESEN, in AIR NAVIGATION SYSTEMS, 5.5.5 IFR Operations, 5.5.5.1 C

c. RNAV(GNSS) Non-precision approach (or RNP APCH).
Pilots operating under the IFR may use GNSS as an APPROACH NAVIGATION AID to determine distance and track information for RNAV (GNSS) Non-precision approach procedures.

So in this instance, we can argue that RNAV is classified as an AID, it is an instrument approach as well as an AID
Therefore whatever AIP says about the alternate without or with navigation aid, applies to RNAV as well since it is not just an instrument approach, it is also an AID.