Hi folks,
Sorry to rehash an old post but I was looking to get some clarity regarding Day VFR to a ALA beyond 50nm. There seems to be a bit of conflicting information about whether or not an alternate is required.
Looking at ENR 1.1 10.7.1.3 it states:
"When an aerodrome forecast is not available, the pilot in command must make a provision for a suitable alternate that has an available forecast."
Originally Posted by
scavenger
Here we go again.
AIP ENR 1.1, 59.2, 59.3 & 59.4 describe the circumstances (weather, navaids and lights) by which an alternate may be required. None of these require an alternate solely on the basis of the availability or otherwise of a TAF.
AIP ENR 1.1, 59.1.3 is intended to be read, as it is contained in Section 59 – Alternate Aerodromes, as the means by which an alternate is disqualified if the TAF is not available or issued as ‘provisional’.
It is not intended to be read as requiring all non-TAF aerodromes or landing sites to have an alternate if no TAF is available.
While I completely agree with the above as making sense, the AIP has had a number of updates since this post and it still reads as though it is referring to a general requirement for an aerodrome forecast being needed otherwise an alternate is required. When looking at the VFRG pg 80 it states:
"
Where a forecast that is required for a planned destination is not available then you must nominate a destination alternate aerodrome."
To me, that seems to contradict what is found in the AIP assuming the former interpretation is correct.
When looking at ENR 1.1 10.1.2.1 Forecasts it states that:
Forecast information must include:
a. an aerodrome forecast for the:
(i) Departure
(ii) Destination; and
(iii) When required, any alternate aerodromes ....
For a flight to a destination for which a prescribed instrument approach procedure does not exist, the minimum requirement is a GAF"
Is my understanding correct that because I am flying to an ALA, I can refer to the GAF for my alternate minima and not provide an alternate given conditions were suitable, however, if I flew VFR to an airport with an IAP and no TAF (e.g BOM reducing their TAF coverage for CAT D airports) I would be required to provide an alternate?
Looking at MOS 91 7.02 (5) it agrees with the above sentiment however, it only makes reference to IFR aircraft utilising a GAF for an airport without an IAP with no mention of VFR. So I'm not sure if I'm interpreting this wrong (likely knowing myself
) or if the regs are just genuinely ambiguous and conflict.