The “over-explaining in FlightInsight style” is exactly why I keep coming back, and I’m not even an instrument student yet! I’m just letting it all sink in for when my instrument training day comes, but the clear style with all the background info (and the terrific graphics) is just right.
For the 1-2-3 rule 14 CFR 91.167(b)(2)(i) states, “For aircraft other than helicopters. For at least 1 hour before and for 1 hour after the estimated time of arrival, the ceiling will be at least 2,000 feet above the airport elevation and the visibility will be at least 3 statute miles.” The example where the TAF had a valid time the same as the ETA would not technically meet the 1-2-3 rule unless the weather forecast for one hour before the ETA also met the 2000’ ceiling and 3SM of visibility due to the use of the word “AND” in the reg.
You are absolutely correct and well spotted mate. The part of the TAF shown was prefixed FM (ie ‘from’ change group indicator as opposed to valid period of TAF) and since it started at the eta you need to see the rest of the TAF to know if it was suitable at 1 hour before eta. It jumped out at me when he said ‘it fulfils the 1 of the 1-2-3’ so I came to the comments to see if it had been picked up but you are the only person to have noticed. Having said that, the FM time is meant to be 4 digits, not 6. Either way, your point stands and the video needs an errata.
One thing nobody in general aviation mentions about the requirements for filing an alternate is a forecast for thunderstorms. The airline I worked for prior to my retirement required our dispatchers to file an alternate if the chances of a TRSA was Prob 40 or Tempo, which is a 50% chance or greater. The FAA does not even recognize the need for an alternate even if there is more than a 50% chance at your ETA of there being a thunderstorm in progress. You cannot land when a thunderstorm is in progress, especially in a single engine airplane, but no FAA requirement to file an alternate. I now fly a Pilatus PC-12NG professionally and I always file an alternate even if the forecast at my destination is for good VFR weather. There are many reasons for needing an alternate that have nothing to do with weather, especially when filing to an airport with one runway. A power failure, disabled airplane on the runway, crosswinds out of limits, and a security violation are just a few, not to mention unforecast weather.
I think you covered it all in a relative short clip; good thing you mentioned that this all is for flight PLANNING only and not applicable anymore after takeoff.
GPS Approaches consideration (filling an alternate) • Non-WAAS GPS: (flight plan based on GPS approaches on either the destination or the alternate BUT NOT BOTH) • WASS without baro-VNAV: (flight plan based on LNAV approaches at both destination and alternate airport) • WASS without baro-VNAV: (flight plan based on LNAV/VNAV RNP 0.3 approaches at both destination and alternate airport)
I had to watch it twice to get it, to be honest i've never seen such a an explanation, on youtube for this subject, thanks for sharing the video, as usual... Great work.
Air Force pilot that has seen a lot of training courses. Your videos are top notch. Thank you, and keep at it! Sharing them with guys making the transition to the commercial world.
These videos are SUPER HELPFUL!!. Very easy to understand! I already completed my IFR training but I wish These videos were available when I did. Maybe some videos for Commercial soon? Before I take my checkride on Nov 10th? :) But I will have to come back to these when I get my CFI/CFII
Excellent! I'm getting ready for my IPC after years of non-IFR flying. I made copies of your charts. Good explanations provided at an easy pace to follow. Too many instructional videos are rapid fire and confusing.
All this reasoning led to my decision to design an application dedicated to tracking fuel consumption, deviations, and autonomy. The catch is that I took on the task of developing it as a self-taught individual. Unfortunately, I wasn't able to compile it for Android, even though I managed to do so under Windows using auto-py-to-exe. When it comes to Android, a whole bunch of issues cropped up. Thank you from Algeria !!
@ 6:30, I think I understood you to say, “… descend in VFR from FILED en route altitude …” I believe the correct requirement is found at §91.169(c)(2), and states, “… allowing descent from MEA … under basic VFR.” The difference is Filed altitude vs. MEA.
I might be over thinking this, but you did not mention what happens if the radio communications fail? If the aircraft or ATC lose communication or radar, the pilot is expected to fly to the destination, and if not able to get in, then to the alternate. You are correct in that once the IFR flight plan is activated and the flight is under ATC control, ATC and the pilot work together. However, if communications and/or radar fail during the flight, the last cleared to fix and the flight plan take over.
Using big major airports as alternate airport can be a mixed blessing. Yes good facilities but your mixing with commercial traffic (Airlines). Yes legal but you can get held up in the airline traffic….especially if middle of the banks. PNE only a few miles further NW but less landing fees, hopefully cheaper fuel and more chance of in and out…especially if time is a factor.
Great video, however only if you change your that ETA to be 03z would you be able to consider the use of that single line TAF to capture the one hour before requirement.
Thanks for another great video. I have a question: when checking for minimums in alternate airports, do we need to also consider a 1 hour window before and after the ETA to that alternate? Or does this window only apply for the destination airport? I missed that in your video.
It’s at the ETA. There 1 hour buffer only applies to the destination airport. The wording of the FAR (91.169 c) says “appropriate weather reports or forecasts or combination” it seems the requirement is more stringent at the destination, if the weather fails the test at any point in that two hour window it fails, but the alternate only has to show better than mins at ETA. Thanks for the great question!
At the ETA of arrival to the alternate, the standard alternate weather minimums must be predicted at 600' AGL and 2SM visibility for precision approaches (ILS), or 800-2 for non-precision approaches(all others). However, many airports have non-standard alternate minimums which are published. If this is the case, there is a black triangle with an "A" printed on the approach plates for that airport. These become your alternate minimums for what approach you would plan to shoot, and predicted weather must correspond at ETA.
For the requirement to maintain VFR for descent & landing (if no compatible IAPs available at alternate, 6:20), I've seen some instructional sources claim that this means marginal VFR does not qualify (as 91.169 references "basic VFR"). I haven't seen marginal vs basic VFR defined in part 91--it only seems to address basic vs special VFR. Can you confirm that basic VFR--as required for alternate airport planning--is referring to 91.155 Basic VFR Minimums, or if it is referring to "3000' AGL+, 5SM+"? Great video--thanks!!
Thanks for such a clear explanation! I have a question, what about ETOPS alternate minimuns? Does them work the same way, regarding Planning fase and airborne fase? Thanks
I know this is something of an edge case, but I'm looking at the approach into Aspen KASE. 2000 AGL ceiling and 3 SM visibility would technically be below minimums for the published approaches. Could you still file here without an alternate or is there something I'm missing?
It's legal. The reg (91.169 b2i) says that the weather should be _at least __ 2000 AGL and 3SM. So it's right there on the edge of legal. It would have to stay that way or better in the forecast for the entire time window from 1 hour before to 1 hour after. Obviously when in doubt, file an alternate!___
In the 07:40 , it mentioned the minimums for each category . But what if it doesn’t show the categories ? For example my category is A and it shows in my Terminal Publication CATEGORY D only 900-3. Does that mean only Class D can Land ? MVN Airport
Maybe this is a dumb question (just starting my IR training): Why does the FBO need to be open if you are planning the RNAV approach? I understand why the A might be there if you are planning the LOC Runway 23, but why would the RNAV runway 23 have that some A designation?
This is a terrific question as your head's in the right place regarding why an FBO would have to be open. Just looking at the notes on the TPP, the RNAV 23 has a footnote number 3, which doesn't relate to the FBO needing to be open. So the FBO actually doesn't need to be open for the RNAV to be used as an alternate, just the LOC. A bit confusing but it's there in the footnotes.
The “over-explaining in FlightInsight style” is exactly why I keep coming back, and I’m not even an instrument student yet! I’m just letting it all sink in for when my instrument training day comes, but the clear style with all the background info (and the terrific graphics) is just right.
There is a special place in heaven for you, man. Thank you for all your videos!
Of course! Thanks so much
Exceptional content indeed
Totally agree. He won't get in line. There is a special elevator for him.
For the 1-2-3 rule 14 CFR 91.167(b)(2)(i) states, “For aircraft other than helicopters. For at least 1 hour before and for 1 hour after the estimated time of arrival, the ceiling will be at least 2,000 feet above the airport elevation and the visibility will be at least 3 statute miles.” The example where the TAF had a valid time the same as the ETA would not technically meet the 1-2-3 rule unless the weather forecast for one hour before the ETA also met the 2000’ ceiling and 3SM of visibility due to the use of the word “AND” in the reg.
You are absolutely correct and well spotted mate. The part of the TAF shown was prefixed FM (ie ‘from’ change group indicator as opposed to valid period of TAF) and since it started at the eta you need to see the rest of the TAF to know if it was suitable at 1 hour before eta. It jumped out at me when he said ‘it fulfils the 1 of the 1-2-3’ so I came to the comments to see if it had been picked up but you are the only person to have noticed.
Having said that, the FM time is meant to be 4 digits, not 6. Either way, your point stands and the video needs an errata.
I came to the comments for this too.
This is video just saved from a check ride panic attack! THANK YOU!
One thing nobody in general aviation mentions about the requirements for filing an alternate is a forecast for thunderstorms. The airline I worked for prior to my retirement required our dispatchers to file an alternate if the chances of a TRSA was Prob 40 or Tempo, which is a 50% chance or greater. The FAA does not even recognize the need for an alternate even if there is more than a 50% chance at your ETA of there being a thunderstorm in progress. You cannot land when a thunderstorm is in progress, especially in a single engine airplane, but no FAA requirement to file an alternate. I now fly a Pilatus PC-12NG professionally and I always file an alternate even if the forecast at my destination is for good VFR weather. There are many reasons for needing an alternate that have nothing to do with weather, especially when filing to an airport with one runway. A power failure, disabled airplane on the runway, crosswinds out of limits, and a security violation are just a few, not to mention unforecast weather.
Definitely using your thought process as I continue forward.
Man this is good stuff - I love the way you explain things, very clear and concise. Looking forward to the instrument ground school.
I think you covered it all in a relative short clip; good thing you mentioned that this all is for flight PLANNING only and not applicable anymore after takeoff.
GPS Approaches consideration (filling an alternate)
• Non-WAAS GPS: (flight plan based on GPS approaches on either the destination or the alternate BUT NOT BOTH)
• WASS without baro-VNAV: (flight plan based on LNAV approaches at both destination and alternate airport)
• WASS without baro-VNAV: (flight plan based on LNAV/VNAV RNP 0.3 approaches at both destination and alternate airport)
I had to watch it twice to get it, to be honest i've never seen such a an explanation, on youtube for this subject, thanks for sharing the video, as usual... Great work.
You're welcome!
Air Force pilot that has seen a lot of training courses. Your videos are top notch. Thank you, and keep at it! Sharing them with guys making the transition to the commercial world.
I feel like a rocket scientist now. Very good deep dive into this subject.
This was such an great video! I really appreciate you making it! Huge help in studying!
Best IFR content on YT!
Thanks, Bill!
Wow. I am very happy to found your videos. I am starting to work on my IFR and these videos are great! So thankful for your work 🙏
I'm happy to be able to help! Let us know how training is going!
I'm sure all pilots are quite happy with your videos.
Bro you broke that down so nicely 👍🏾
Love your videos on IFR! Clear audio and great information!! Thanks!!
Thanks so much for letting me know!
This channel is fantastic, best education yet! Although I have been an IFR pilot for a number of years, this is a great refresher!
These videos are SUPER HELPFUL!!. Very easy to understand!
I already completed my IFR training but I wish These videos were available when I did. Maybe some videos for Commercial soon? Before I take my checkride on Nov 10th? :)
But I will have to come back to these when I get my CFI/CFII
Hey it's a license to learn right? Thanks for watching!
You are really good at explaining stuffs man. Thank you
Best explanation I have seen in my life so far. Thanks!
Excellent! I'm getting ready for my IPC after years of non-IFR flying. I made copies of your charts. Good explanations provided at an easy pace to follow. Too many instructional videos are rapid fire and confusing.
Best of luck!
All this reasoning led to my decision to design an application dedicated to tracking fuel consumption, deviations, and autonomy. The catch is that I took on the task of developing it as a self-taught individual. Unfortunately, I wasn't able to compile it for Android, even though I managed to do so under Windows using auto-py-to-exe. When it comes to Android, a whole bunch of issues cropped up. Thank you from Algeria !!
Best IFR training videos I've ever seen. Great video!
This was great, exactly what I was looking for! Thank you
Great job, a lot covered in a short clip, clear and concise! Greatly appreciated
@ 6:30, I think I understood you to say, “… descend in VFR from FILED en route altitude …” I believe the correct requirement is found at §91.169(c)(2), and states, “… allowing descent from MEA … under basic VFR.” The difference is Filed altitude vs. MEA.
Another great video.
You have been a great learning source for me and for that I thank you.
At times I wish I could call you and thank you in person.
Regards
Youre too good. I have no words
I might be over thinking this, but you did not mention what happens if the radio communications fail? If the aircraft or ATC lose communication or radar, the pilot is expected to fly to the destination, and if not able to get in, then to the alternate. You are correct in that once the IFR flight plan is activated and the flight is under ATC control, ATC and the pilot work together. However, if communications and/or radar fail during the flight, the last cleared to fix and the flight plan take over.
Thank you very much again for amazing 🤩 videosssssss!
GREAT VIDEO!! I took a screenshot of your matrix! That was very well explained.
Awesome! I’m working on getting it tattooed on my arm myself
Hahaha me too !
Great Video. Thanks
Excellent video, thank you!
Using big major airports as alternate airport can be a mixed blessing. Yes good facilities but your mixing with commercial traffic (Airlines). Yes legal but you can get held up in the airline traffic….especially if middle of the banks. PNE only a few miles further NW but less landing fees, hopefully cheaper fuel and more chance of in and out…especially if time is a factor.
Best videos out there! THANK YOU! GRACIAS! ❤️
Excellent
As always great detailed explanations!
Great video, however only if you change your that ETA to be 03z would you be able to consider the use of that single line TAF to capture the one hour before requirement.
11:08 True hero
Thank you for sharing
Thanks for another great video. I have a question: when checking for minimums in alternate airports, do we need to also consider a 1 hour window before and after the ETA to that alternate? Or does this window only apply for the destination airport? I missed that in your video.
It’s at the ETA. There 1 hour buffer only applies to the destination airport. The wording of the FAR (91.169 c) says “appropriate weather reports or forecasts or combination” it seems the requirement is more stringent at the destination, if the weather fails the test at any point in that two hour window it fails, but the alternate only has to show better than mins at ETA. Thanks for the great question!
At the ETA of arrival to the alternate, the standard alternate weather minimums must be predicted at 600' AGL and 2SM visibility for precision approaches (ILS), or 800-2 for non-precision approaches(all others). However, many airports have non-standard alternate minimums which are published. If this is the case, there is a black triangle with an "A" printed on the approach plates for that airport. These become your alternate minimums for what approach you would plan to shoot, and predicted weather must correspond at ETA.
Just superrrr
Thanks!
Great video as always. Any chance you can upload a copy of the flow chart somewhere? I would love to add this to my preflight binder.
Thanks!
Great video
For the requirement to maintain VFR for descent & landing (if no compatible IAPs available at alternate, 6:20), I've seen some instructional sources claim that this means marginal VFR does not qualify (as 91.169 references "basic VFR"). I haven't seen marginal vs basic VFR defined in part 91--it only seems to address basic vs special VFR. Can you confirm that basic VFR--as required for alternate airport planning--is referring to 91.155 Basic VFR Minimums, or if it is referring to "3000' AGL+, 5SM+"?
Great video--thanks!!
Thanks for such a clear explanation! I have a question, what about ETOPS alternate minimuns? Does them work the same way, regarding Planning fase and airborne fase? Thanks
love the content
As of now 2024, is the FAA still considering RNAV approaches like LPV and LNAV/VNAV non-precision?
Yes. Still non precision
@@bernardogarciareta6062 the military considers LPV a precision approach, how does that make sense
Ha! I know, it doesn't make sense, but it is what it is 😢
@@bernardogarciareta6062 so Im guessing after a military career of flying, I have to recount my approaches accordingly right?
This is super helpful!
What do you look for from one hour before until one hour after if the airport you are flight to doesn't have a TAF? Thanks.
Can you share a copy of the flow chart? I want to put it in my ForeFlight
I know this is something of an edge case, but I'm looking at the approach into Aspen KASE. 2000 AGL ceiling and 3 SM visibility would technically be below minimums for the published approaches. Could you still file here without an alternate or is there something I'm missing?
It's legal. The reg (91.169 b2i) says that the weather should be _at least __ 2000 AGL and 3SM. So it's right there on the edge of legal. It would have to stay that way or better in the forecast for the entire time window from 1 hour before to 1 hour after. Obviously when in doubt, file an alternate!___
There's guidance on that exact scenario and other mountainous airports in the AIM 5-1-10
11:03 Conclusion
In the 07:40 , it mentioned the minimums for each category . But what if it doesn’t show the categories ? For example my category is A and it shows in my Terminal Publication CATEGORY D only 900-3. Does that mean only Class D can Land ?
MVN Airport
Good question. No it just means the other cats use standard alternate mins, 600-2 for the ILS
How much different is this for Part 91 vs 121 vs 135?
Maybe this is a dumb question (just starting my IR training): Why does the FBO need to be open if you are planning the RNAV approach? I understand why the A might be there if you are planning the LOC Runway 23, but why would the RNAV runway 23 have that some A designation?
This is a terrific question as your head's in the right place regarding why an FBO would have to be open. Just looking at the notes on the TPP, the RNAV 23 has a footnote number 3, which doesn't relate to the FBO needing to be open. So the FBO actually doesn't need to be open for the RNAV to be used as an alternate, just the LOC. A bit confusing but it's there in the footnotes.
🌟🌟🌟🌟🌟