Part 91 and visibility requirments

[extra-november]

I have always heard that visibility requirments don't apply to part 91 operators, and that they can land an any visibility they want; so why then are there rules like 91.175? The rule starts with "91" after all?

[Pugilistic Animus]

you must respect the visibility and MDA/DH on all IFR approaches
the visibility requirements don't apply for TO under part 91; a zero/zero TO is legal, but dumb---I'm not sure if that's what you meant---but I believe you query is centered around TO mins?

[galaxy flyer]

Also, while FAR 121 and 135 operators HAVE to have the reported visibility met or exceed the minimums for the approach used, FAR 91 operators do not need the visibility to start the approach, just the "flight" visibility at the DA or MDA must be at or above mins.

In other words, reported RVR is 1800 feet, ILS mins are 2400 feet, the 91 operator could fly the approach, at DA, see the runway and land. The 121 or 135 operator could not proceed past the FAF with that reported visibility. I.E. there is no approach ban for US 91 operations. Yes, the FAA has violated Part 91 operators in a few cases.

GF

[411A]

Yes, the FAA has violated Part 91 operators in a few cases.

Indeed so...been known to happen.
14CFR91 carries with it the responsibilities of prudent flying...stubb your toe, expect consequences, sometimes not to your liking.
And yes, the FAA has ops inspectors on the watch for unruly behaviour.
They might well nail your hide to the barn door, IF you are stupid enough to land well below reported minimums.

[galaxy flyer]

411A

There was a fairly famous case at KHPN where on a rather foggy day, as is common there, where a whole line of corporate operators were cited for landing below mins when each swore they had the lights in sight at DA of 200 feet AGL. Don't know the outcome of the proceedings.

GF

[con-pilot]

I landed at PHI once in the 727 and the FAA claimed that we had busted minimums. We had not and the three of us in cockpit all testified to that on the inquiry, then they tried to nail us saying that we were a 121 operation. We were Public Use, so they couldn't get us on that either.

Finally we sent a request to the agency requesting the name and position of the person who had reported us as landing below minimums and just where were they in relationship to the end of the runway and the touchdown zone.. We never heard back from them.

I remember the approach and landing very well, we did break out right at minimums, but by the time we rolled out to the end of the runway I could not see to taxi farther than one runway light, even then I had the side window open and was hugging the left side of the runway and taxiway as I had my head out of the window looking nearly straight down. It took forever to get to the ramp.