ETE's on IFR flight plans
Dh2pilot
from takeoff to landing or to the IAF for an instrument approach at the
destination airport? I realize there may be more than one IAF, but I am
assuming you would just pick whichever one seems most reasonable to use at
the time and figure the ETE to that IAF.
I have always practiced and taught the second option--ETE is the time to
the IAF--and base this on the reasoning that the main (only???) purpose
for ETE is to give you a time at which to start the approach in an
enroute-NORDO situation. Therefore, figuring ETE to the IAF seems logical
and reasonable to me. Howver, I am not aware of any real guidance on this
in the FAR's or AIM other than some definitions in the glossaries which
seem contradictory.
Please email me at DH2P...@AOL.COM with your opinions and how you do it.
Additionally, if you have a source of information in an "official"-type
publication, I would appreciate directing me to it. THANKS in advance for
any input.
Brian Slawin
Harlo Peterson
wrote:
:When listing an ETE for an IFR flight plan, should the time be figured
For an "official"-type publication try the FARs. The answer about what to
put in a flight plan is in the section of the FARs that describe what to
put in a flight plan. Your first option is closer to what the FARs
require. Your second options may be logical and reasonable but it
conflicts with the FARs as written.
Also check out 91.167, fuel requirements. ETE to the airport is used to
determine whether or not an alternate is required. It looks like the ETE
main use is for fuel planning on every flight, not just for the rare case
of lost comm in IMC.
91.169 IFR flight plan: Information required.
(a) Information required. Unless otherwise authorized by ATC, each person
filing an IFR flight plan shall include in it the following information:
(1) Information required under § 91.153(a).
91.153 VFR flight plan: Information required.
(a) Information required. Unless otherwise authorized by ATC, each person
filing a VFR flight plan shall include in it the following information:
(6) The point of first intended landing and the estimated elapsed time
until over that point.
(7) The amount of fuel on board (in hours).
91.167 Fuel requirements for flight in IFR conditions.
(a) Except as provided in paragraph (b) of this section, no person may
operate a civil aircraft in IFR conditions unless it carries enough fuel
(considering weather reports and forecasts and weather conditions) to -
(1) Complete the flight to the first airport of intended landing;
(2) Fly from that airport to the alternate airport; and
(3) Fly after that for 45 minutes at normal cruising speed or, for
helicopters, fly after that for 30 minutes at normal cruising speed.
(b) Paragraph (a)(2) of this section does not apply if -
(1) Part 97 of this chapter prescribes a standard instrument approach
procedure for the first airport of intended landing; and
(2) For at least 1 hour before and 1 hour after the estimated time of
arrival at the airport, the weather reports or forecasts or any
combination of them indicate -
(i) The ceiling will be at least 2,000 feet above the airport
elevation; and
(ii) Visibility will be at least 3 statute miles.
--
Harlo Peterson Digital Equipment Corporation
pete...@specxn.enet.dec.com 305 Rockrimmon Blvd South (CXO3-1/E9)
+1.719.592.5124 Colorado Springs, CO 80919-2398
Guy A. Lyle
>When listing an ETE for an IFR flight plan, should the time be figured
>from takeoff to landing or to the IAF for an instrument approach at the
>destination airport?
For IFR plans, I was taught to figure ETE to the "fix from which an
approach begins ... and commence ... as close as possible to the
estimated time of arrival ... from the filed ... estimated time
en route", per FAR 91.185. In most cases this is an IAF, but
in some it might be a transition fix (which _is_ an approach fix).
This came up on my instrument check ride and was confirmed by
the designated examiner.
>I realize there may be more than one IAF, but I am
>assuming you would just pick whichever one seems most reasonable to use at
>the time and figure the ETE to that IAF.
I pick the one that I will most likely be using given my planned
route and the forecast winds at the destination.
>I have always practiced and taught the second option--ETE is the time to
>the IAF--and base this on the reasoning that the main (only???) purpose
>for ETE is to give you a time at which to start the approach in an
>enroute-NORDO situation.
This is what I also recall.
> [remaineder SNIPPED]
Guy Lyle
________________________________________
\ Guy A. Lyle (gl...@interaccess.com) /
< Lake Zurich, IL, USA >
/______________________________________\
Greg
>From: Guy A. Lyle <gl...@interaccess.com>
>Subject: Re: ETE's on IFR flight plans
>Date: 26 Feb 1995 05:41:39 GMT
>Dh2pilot, dh2p...@aol.com writes:
>>When listing an ETE for an IFR flight plan, should the time be figured
>>from takeoff to landing or to the IAF for an instrument approach at the
>>destination airport?
>For IFR plans, I was taught to figure ETE to the "fix from which an
>approach begins ... and commence ... as close as possible to the
>estimated time of arrival ... from the filed ... estimated time
>en route", per FAR 91.185. In most cases this is an IAF, but
>in some it might be a transition fix (which _is_ an approach fix).
>This came up on my instrument check ride and was confirmed by
>the designated examiner.
>>I realize there may be more than one IAF, but I am
>>assuming you would just pick whichever one seems most reasonable to use at
>>the time and figure the ETE to that IAF.
>I pick the one that I will most likely be using given my planned
>route and the forecast winds at the destination.
>>I have always practiced and taught the second option--ETE is the time to
>>the IAF--and base this on the reasoning that the main (only???) purpose
>>for ETE is to give you a time at which to start the approach in an
>>enroute-NORDO situation.
From the above scenario - one would assume these pilots were flying.
From experience: One recognizes this is all bullshit from Cessna wannabe's.
Harlo Peterson
<gl...@interaccess.com> wrote:
:For IFR plans, I was taught to figure ETE to the "fix from which an
:approach begins ... and commence ... as close as possible to the
:estimated time of arrival ... from the filed ... estimated time
:en route", per FAR 91.185. In most cases this is an IAF, but
:in some it might be a transition fix (which _is_ an approach fix).
:This came up on my instrument check ride and was confirmed by
:the designated examiner.
You were taught wrong and the DE was wrong - DEs are not infallible. You
are using the wrong FAR for guidance. 91.185(c)(3) use of ETE only applys
to lost comm when the clearance limit is for a point other than the
destination airport.
When you get a Nxxx cleared to the yyy airport it means ATC has cleared
you to the yyy airport, not to some place other than the airport and not
an IAF for the airport. If you lose comm when flying under an airport
destination clearance, you fly an approach without any delays and land. If
you arrive early, don't hold at an IAF for your calculated ETA as
91.185(c)(3) does not apply.
The major use of the ETE is for fuel and alternate planning. Don't try to
fake it out for the extremely rare case that the 91.185(c)(3) use of ETE
covers.
The only correct answer of what to put in a flight plan is follow the FARs
that explicitely pertain to what to put in a flight plan:
91.169 IFR flight plan: Information required.
(a) Information required. Unless otherwise authorized by ATC, each person
filing an IFR flight plan shall include in it the following information:
(1) Information required under § 91.153(a).
91.153 VFR flight plan: Information required.
(a) Information required. Unless otherwise authorized by ATC, each person
filing a VFR flight plan shall include in it the following information:
* (6) The point of first intended landing and the estimated elapsed time
* until over that point.
91.185 IFR operations: Two-way radio communications failure.
(c) IFR conditions.
(3) Leave clearance limit.
(i) When the clearance limit is a fix from which an approach begins,
commence descent or descent and approach as close as possible to
the expect further clearance time if one has been received, or if
one has not been received, as close as possible to the estimated
time of arrival as calculated from the filed or amended (with ATC)
estimated time enroute.
(ii) If the clearance limit is not a fix from which an approach
begins, leave the clearance limit at the expect further
clearance time if one has been received, or if none has been
received, upon arrival over the clearance limit, and proceed
to a fix from which an approach begins and commence descent or
descent and approach as close as possible to the estimated
time of arrival as calculated from the filed or amended
(with ATC) estimated time enroute.
Guy A. Lyle
>In article <3ip4aj$7...@nntp.interaccess.com>, Guy A. Lyle
><gl...@interaccess.com> wrote:
>:For IFR plans, I was taught to figure ETE to the "fix from which an
>
>You were taught wrong and the DE was wrong - DEs are not infallible. You
>are using the wrong FAR for guidance. 91.185(c)(3) use of ETE only applys
>to lost comm when the clearance limit is for a point other than the
>destination airport.
>
>When you get a Nxxx cleared to the yyy airport it means ATC has cleared
>you to the yyy airport, not to some place other than the airport and not
>an IAF for the airport. If you lose comm when flying under an airport
>destination clearance, you fly an approach without any delays and land. If
>you arrive early, don't hold at an IAF for your calculated ETA as
>91.185(c)(3) does not apply.
So, if I understand you correctly:
a) your last clearance is to yyy airport
b) AND you have lost comm enroute
c) AND your ETA (based upon your ETE) is 0230Z
d) AND you arrive at a "fix from which the approach begins" at 0210Z.
You are going to shoot the approach immediately?
I agree that the wording of 91.185(c)(3) does not address this
situation directly, but I am not sure I would feel comfortable
shooting an approach 20 minutes before ATC is expecting me to arrive.
If memory and _Instrument Flight Training Manual_ (Dogan, 1985/6)
serve correctly, ATC will "close" the destination airport from my
filed/amended ETA until 30 minutes past my filed/amended ETA. Outside
that timeframe there is an increased chance that my aircraft and some
other aircraft could attempt to occupy the same volume of space at the
same time.
>The major use of the ETE is for fuel and alternate planning. Don't try to
>fake it out for the extremely rare case that the 91.185(c)(3) use of ETE
>covers. [...other stuff SNIPPED]
The filed Flight Plan is for ATC's needs in supporting our flight,
not for our needs in planning the flight. There are common areas
(e.g., route), but the needs of ATC and we pilots are slightly
different. There are other factors in fuel consumption (startup,
taxi, runup, take off, ...) about which ATC could care less, but we
as pilots cannot. Put another way, Flight Plans are _not_ ATC's way
of making sure that we do our pre-flight fuel estimates.
I agree that lost comm is rare. I also think the real question is,
"What does ATC use the _IFR_ ETEs for?". The only answer I have
heard to date is, "They use it to calculate ETA for lost comm
situations". [If there are any other answers to that question,
PLEASE speak up!]
I see 91.169(a)(1) and 91.153(a)(6), as you correctly point out.
The AIM also states that the ETE is from lift-off until touch-down
(Glossary), taking forecast winds into consideration (5-7(f)).
However, if fuel is an issue, and I would be expected to hold at a
"fix from which an approach begins" during lost comm procedures, I
can't help wonder if it isn't smarter to use an ETE for the most
likely fix rather than burn fuel while holding and waiting until my
ETA comes up. It may not be "according to Hoyle", but I'll take
fuel reserve over Hoyle any day.
Regardless, thanks for making me spend some more time thinking about
the issue. This is the internet -- where we all agree to disagree
at times ;-) .