Page 13 - COPA_July2023

Jerrold Seckler, COPA SEF President
The clearance was specific. The lost comm rules are specific and we are expected to follow them.
If the pilot considered lost comms to be an emergency (and that would not be unreasonable) then after squawking 7600 for a minute or two he should have declared by switching to 7700 and then, using his emergency authority could do whatever he wanted to deal with the emergency such as returning to the airport of departure.
ATC prefers predictability and had he simply continued his clearance, they would have ensured separation from other aircraft and cleared his path for the eventual approach.
Brian Turrisi, CPPP Instructor
But that would have been more than an hour of flying through 3 ATC facilities. That would cause more ATC havoc than what he did. Squawking 7700 is a nonspecific emergency so ATC would have no idea of the nature of the emergency; 7600 was very specific. This is one time where what is legal and written is NOT the safest way to go. We all know pilots have emergencies that they do officially declare. It should not matter! Get on the ground when things are not right!
Jerrold Seckler, COPA SEF President
Brian,
We rarely disagree but we do here, 7600 tells ATC that the plane has lost communications. They can track him and ensure IFR separation by moving other aircraft if they need to. They can also “sterilize” the airspace for whatever approach it seems he is going to use. They assume that the pilot will follow the rules for route, altitude, and time for the approach and easily plan around it.
Jack Long, COPA Member
If the plane squawks 7600 before 7700 it tells ATC what the emergency is. But the unpredictability of what a 7700 no radio aircraft is going to do is a real issue and would almost certainly cause far more ATC problems than just proceeding as previously cleared.
But as Jerry suggested, squawking 7600 for a minute or two, then 7700 and finally doing exactly what he did in terms of returning to the airport covers both bases. ATC knows you are NORDO and then the 7700 primes them that you may deviate from your clearance.
cirruspilots.org
Gordon Feingold, COPA Member
The endgame is where I have heard otherwise from virtually every controller, I have talked to about this. I’m referring to the rule which states you should enter a hold at an IAF at the destination airport until your EFC or flight planned ETE comes up before executing the approach. Most controllers didn’t even know that was a requirement and were aghast at the prospect. To a man/woman, they said they expected (and wanted) a NORDO airplane to execute the approach immediately upon arriving at the IAF.
There’s another wrinkle here. In the old days, one filed to an IAF at the destination airport. These days, often the last “fix” in the flight plan, and the point you are cleared to, is the airport itself. Back then, with no GPS, there was no way to fly to the airport. Now, of course, you can. But should you, before flying the approach? After all, it was what you were originally “cleared to,” and, often these days, ATC will give that as the clearance limit while en route.
To me, it’s nonsensical to fly to the airport as a waypoint and then wander around to an IAF and make the approach, especially since such a path would likely involve a HILPT or PT. ATC would be going bonkers, especially at a busy airport.
I would choose a suitable approach based on direction of flight and destination airport weather and proceed to its IAF and shoot it immediately.
Thomas Daniel - CSIP, COPA Member
It is good to separate the regulatory answer from the practical one because regulations are unfortunately impractical in case of lost comms.
From a regulation’s perspective, i.e., if this was a question on an IRA oral, the answer is in 91.185. Fly the route filed to the destination airport because that is the clearance limit, then fly to an IAF, hold there until ETA, if necessary, start descending, and start approach at ETA. Altitude wise, climb to 8,000 after 10 minutes and maintain 8,000 until IAF unless there is MEA which is higher, which is probably unlikely there.
Practically speaking, returning to the departure airport is the wise choice in this case and squawking 7700 protects the pilot and gives ATC tools to protect airspace as necessary.
Brian Turrisi, CPPP Instructor
I brought up this case because I recognized as soon as I heard about the dilemma of what the regs say and what is practical to do. I find these answers interesting because they all express quite a rigidity in thinking. For that reason, I am siding with
VOLUME 18, NUMBER 7
11
FROM THE FORUMS