Wikiposts
Search
The Pacific: General Aviation & Questions The place for students, instructors and charter guys in Oz, NZ and the rest of Oceania.

Requirement for alternates

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old 29th Oct 2009, 21:19
  #1 (permalink)  
Jazzy78910
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Requirement for alternates

IF a TAF says:
FM300200 10013KT 9999 LIGHT SHOWERS OF RAIN SCT035 SCT050

and the ARFOR offers:

VISIBILITY:
LESS THAN 1000M IN FOG, 2000M IN TSRA, 3000M IN SHRA, 6KM IN SMOKE
HAZE.

Under Day VFR (8Km VIS, 1500ft Ceiling alternate minima) Would I need to nominate an alternate? Or would the clouds being scattered mean that it's okay anyway


 
Old 29th Oct 2009, 21:35
  #2 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Australia
Posts: 15
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
The visbility in the terminal forecast is greater than 10 km. So you don't require an alternate.
Jay & Silent Bob is offline  
Old 29th Oct 2009, 22:09
  #3 (permalink)  
tmpffisch
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
TAF is the one to worry about for alternate requirements.
 
Old 29th Oct 2009, 22:11
  #4 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Sydney
Age: 44
Posts: 121
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
arfor

a good day to be thinkin do i really need to go flyin today???
aero979 is offline  
Old 30th Oct 2009, 00:49
  #5 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: The Shire
Posts: 2,890
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Provided you can remain in VMC during the enroute cruise then you are right to go.

Alternates are based on the TAF/TTF not the METAR or ARFOR. The only time you can use an ARFOR for alternate requirements is NVFR/IFR situations which I don't think are applicable to day VFR.

Calling it a day is generally not an option when you are paid to fly unless there is a cyclone or something equally as devastating in the area. Getting some experience in (with an instructor initially) some less than ideal conditions gets my thumbs up if you are going to be a professional pilot. The first time you fly in such conditions you don't want fair paying punters up that back!
The Green Goblin is offline  
Old 30th Oct 2009, 01:00
  #6 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: oz
Posts: 88
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
You use ARFOR for determining alternates for aerodromes without a met service too. So in the above case, if you were going someplace without a TAF, you need to have fuel for an alternate as the wx is below the minima according to the AFROR.
SM227 is offline  
Old 30th Oct 2009, 11:05
  #7 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: The Ponderosa
Age: 52
Posts: 845
Received 16 Likes on 6 Posts
jazzy,in additition to the correct answer look at the real big picture.

how big is the area covered in a TAF and how big is an ARFOR?

5nm radius for an aerodrome forecast and an ARFOR can be the size of a state! take area 30 and 70 for an example. the ARFOR in your question could have fog in east sale, thunderstorms in mildura, showers in wangaratta and smoke on king island!

or you could get all the above phenomenon just in the terminal area at YMML in the space of 30 minutes somedays.
hoss is offline  
Old 30th Oct 2009, 15:00
  #8 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Australia
Posts: 429
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
or you could get all the above phenomenon just in the terminal area at YMML in the space of 30 minutes somedays.
That would be tonight.
eocvictim is offline  
Old 30th Oct 2009, 21:29
  #9 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Aus
Posts: 2,792
Received 419 Likes on 231 Posts
Only the TAF/TTF (aerodrome forecasts) may be used for deciding alternate requirements, AIP ENR ref;

73.1.3 When an aerodrome forecast is not available or is “provisional”, the pilot in command must make provision for a suitable alternate that has a firm forecast.
No TAF/TTF alternate required. IFR to a no-aid the TAF is still required plus an ARFOR to determine cloud over the last route segment. How would you calculate expected crosswind/downwind componant from an ARFOR?
43Inches is offline  
Old 31st Oct 2009, 12:05
  #10 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Qld troppo
Posts: 3,498
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes on 2 Posts
Under Day VFR (8Km VIS, 1500ft Ceiling alternate minima) Would I need to nominate an alternate?


Did someone change the rules while I was off fishing?

Given that you don't need to submit details for a day VFR flight, why would you need to nominate an alternate?

Dr
ForkTailedDrKiller is offline  
Old 31st Oct 2009, 12:26
  #11 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Australia
Age: 74
Posts: 1,384
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
FTDK = 1, The rest 0

Last edited by Arnold E; 31st Oct 2009 at 12:28. Reason: Added the "K"
Arnold E is offline  
Old 31st Oct 2009, 15:09
  #12 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Australia
Posts: 429
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
"Except when operating an aircraft under the VFR by day within 50nm of the point of departure, the pilot in command must provide for a suitable alternate aerodrome..." AIR ENR 1.1 73.2.1

Long fishing trip aye...
eocvictim is offline  
Old 31st Oct 2009, 19:28
  #13 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Brisvegas
Age: 46
Posts: 309
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
GA in the territory wet season was always interesting...especially during the monsoon. Since 90% of the aerodromes that we operated to did not have any form of TAF/TTF, the only forecast applicable was the ARFOR, which quite often had cloud/vis below the VFR criteria (8km/1500ft). Usually this was not a problem as Darwin was the nominated 'alternate' and round trip fuel was the norm. However, on days where Darwin required an alternate (along with everywhere else), we were pretty much snookered i.e. couldn't legally depart.

FTDK,

Better pull that AIP out again and have a read.
Tempo is offline  
Old 1st Nov 2009, 01:03
  #14 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 1998
Location: Escapee from Ultima Thule
Posts: 4,273
Received 2 Likes on 2 Posts
FTDK, not being required to submit a plan is not the same as being required to plan for an alternate
Tinstaafl is offline  
Old 1st Nov 2009, 01:58
  #15 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Qld troppo
Posts: 3,498
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes on 2 Posts
not being required to submit a plan is not the same as being required to plan for an alternate
True!

..... and planning for an alternate is not the same as "nominating an alternate" !

Dr
ForkTailedDrKiller is offline  
Old 1st Nov 2009, 08:38
  #16 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: in the classroom of life
Age: 55
Posts: 6,864
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Cracker of a thread.......... That is the type of question you would get in an exam....where the choice of answers is a careful selection of words.

Remember READ the question. ...........something guilty of falling for myself many a time
Jabawocky is offline  
Old 3rd Dec 2009, 14:05
  #17 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Hollister, Hilo, Pago Pago, Norfolk Is., Brisbane, depending which day of the week it is...
Age: 51
Posts: 1,352
Received 31 Likes on 9 Posts
This debate follows the same lines as "just because the weather is above VMC doesn't mean you SHOULD go".

Not much consolation when you're sitting beside a wrecked bonza (for lack of a better scenario) wishing you HAD notified someone of where you were going.

Sorta comes under the category of AIRMANSHIP.

The visbility in the terminal forecast is greater than 10 km. So you don't require an alternate.
That's not the only consideration. You need to look at the validity of the forecast, Cloud level and quantity and x/wind strength. It only takes one component to create the requirement.

GG. Only aerodromes with instrument approaches will get TAF's. An ARFOR is the minimum consideration as per the AIPs.
MakeItHappenCaptain is offline  

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service

Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.