"What are you intending to do, Jones?"
"I'm going to fly my aeroplane into that cloud, Boss."
"Are you allowing for a weather-safe alternate?"
"Nope, I'd like to, but can't carry the fuel."
"That's fine - once in that cloud then, how are you going to get out of it without hitting the ground first?"
Scenario One
"I'm going to shoot the approach at my destination."
"Then you need a TAF, and to be reasonably safe, one which shows that the weather will be above the alternate minima"
Scenario Two
"I can't shoot an approach at my destination, so I intend to descend to the LSALT, become visual, and continue for a visual approach."
"Then you need an ARFOR, and one which shows that you can reasonably expect to become visual at the LSALT - say +500' and 8km vis."
Now, that seems the common sense approach to me. I don't see why it matters if an aerodrome has an approach specified
if you do not plan to use it, perhaps due lack of equipment or whatever - and if you never crash, no one will ever ask!
