Can you answer all these regulations questions and stay legal in the IFR system?
To meet the minimum instrument experience requirements, within the last 6 calendar months you need to have flown
Correct!Wrong!
An instrument rated pilot, who has not logged any instrument time in 1 year or more, cannot serve as pilot in command under IFR, unless the pilot
Correct!Wrong!
The en route weather is IMC. However, during the descent on an ILS approach, you encounter VMC prior to reaching the initial approach fix. To log the approach toward instrument currency
Correct!Wrong!
Under which of the following conditions must a pilot have at least an instrument rating?
Correct!Wrong!
When is an IFR clearance required during VFR weather conditions?
Correct!Wrong!
What minimum conditions must exist at the destination airport to avoid listing an alternate airport on an IFR flight plan when a standard IAP is available?
Correct!Wrong!
Which procedure should you follow if, during an IFR flight in VFR conditions, you have two way radio communications failure?
Correct!Wrong!
An airport without an authorized instrument approach procedure may be included as the alternate on an IFR flight plan if the forecast indicates that the ceiling and visibility at the ETA will
Correct!Wrong!
The fuel requirements for flight in IFR conditions states that you must have enough fuel to fly to destination, your alternate, and have a reserve of:
Correct!Wrong!
If a pilot chooses to fly to the selected alternate, the landing minimums used at that airport should be the
The conditions we accept for a flight – like how low we’ll descend in IMC – are truly personal. Among GA instrument pilots, there’s a wide range of what they’re willing to do, and happily most are respectful of their “personal minimums.” This risk-management system is ubiquitous and now has a larger presence in training standards. It even has its own chapter in an FAA handbook (more on that later). However, in the day-to-day, this doesn’t get the care and feeding it should, and when it does, the methods of use vary just as much as the “minimums” pilots set for themselves.
The wide range of personal minimums isn’t a problem per se – we all differ in our missions, aircraft, and risk tolerance. The problem is that it’s often created as a fill-in-the-blanks document (usually at the prodding of the CFI-I giving an IPC). This soon finds its way to the bottom of the electronic or physical flight bag. Over months or even just weeks, those numbers are forgotten or outdated unless a pilot flies regularly and under similar conditions. Another related issue is that personal minimums are treated as a snapshot of one’s present comfort level, and not as a “proficiency gauge” that requires monitoring and action. Thinking about personal minimums as more of a flight instrument, with ranges and limits, is a better way to check proficiency and, in the end, manage risk.
Limits and Ranges
Minimums are inherently built into the system, so we do pay a lot of attention to what we’d accept for visibility, ceilings, and certain operations like instrument departures. The FAA’s Risk Management Handbook (FAA-H-8083-2A edition) has a chapter on Personal Minimums, offering a step-by-step guide to make your own. This is a great start, especially for those working on the instrument rating. It discusses more than visibility-ceiling considerations, with items like turbulence, terrain, and personal health. We can build on this by viewing minimums as “Limitations” and adding a personal “Operating Range” for your missions.
Start with the Red Line, or Things You Don’t Do. Most of us don’t conduct 0-0 takeoffs even if legal for Part 91 operations (good call). Now: What’s your yellow range, or green? Depends. Say you’re OK flying to approach minimums; you use those for the departure runway in case of an emergency return. Put that together with the estimated ceiling at which you’d break out at the final approach fix to make a “yellow caution range” for a given runway, and weather above that as green. You’ll more carefully consider all the factors before accepting that departure; or maybe this time you want to be in the green arc. This method works for IFR approaches in general.
This mindset applies beyond routine operations. Abnormal or emergency operations can have operating ranges, too. Another common red line: flying to an airport where a circle-to-land at MDA is the only way to get in. Consider your own green arc, even if it has to be clear-and-10. Keep in mind that “never-do” doesn’t mean “never-practice” – in fact, this is something you should practice in safe conditions (under training if need be). Of course, circling approaches are required for an IPC, and it’s a great emergency skill – something you would never do unless, well, you have to.
Quick Poll
Moving Needles
Then, make this part of post-flight routines and carry it into the next pre-flight. When you log flights, include remarks on the vis, ceiling, winds, runway length, approach type, etc. and if you want, email it to yourself and take a look the next day. Was it comfortable on that approach, or were you white-knuckled during vectors? Would you happily do it tomorrow? If no, consider what makes it “yes” and adjust accordingly. It’s likely something will happen eventually that changes your comfort level, brings your attention to a skill gap, or has you gaining confidence flying that long route. This also helps avoid “limit creep,” a common downside to plain-old personal minimums in which landing a knot past your stated crosswind limit can start a trail of complacency. You weren’t suddenly unsafe going from 15 to 16 knots, so 17’s OK…we’d never treat Vne that way. So while respecting the confines of your envelope, watch for trends up or down in your skills over time and make adjustments for the future, not for today’s trip. That’s good risk management.
This approach to personal operating ranges and limitations can also include the flexibility we all want from our flying. Much like aircraft performance varying with weight, altitude, and weather, any particular mission will have custom parameters. You might still have that same weather red line for the next IFR trip, but maybe the green arc is wider since you’re flying with another pilot. Or you agree to fly to a new destination because you’ve tightened up the yellow range for weight to maximize fuel.
The Skill Gauge
Like the circling MDA example, regular training and practice to the highest level of proficiency you can achieve above your personal real-flying envelope will make the best use of those limits. That’s a never-ending process, of course; we’ll never run out of things we need to work on. But why train to approach minimums if we choose not to fly in low weather? First, this automatically widens the risk margin. A big green arc means your IFR comfort level isn’t on the edge, which can only make flying more fun. And it can save your life if something unexpected happens and you’re able to manage that as comfortably as possible.
And it’s built into the requirements for maintaining currency. The FAA’s InFo 15012 on “Logging Instrument Approach Procedures (IAP)” provides guidance on when you can log approaches. One often-overlooked requirement is when practicing in flight under simulated IMC, you must fly to the MDA or DA/DH before going missed or “breaking out.” If traffic or other hazards prevented this but you did fly past the FAF, you can still log it. So in practice, you’re going for maximum proficiency, to the fullest extent of your privileges.
We mentioned “gauge” earlier; think of your skill level as a fuel gauge – decreases in proficiency empty the tank, while solid skills fill it back up. And you don’t want to go empty, or even close to it. The nice system you’ve built now has limits, ranges, and ways to monitor it without making impulsive changes. In addition to post-flight briefings, it’s helpful to review the whole thing on a periodic schedule, such as during your annual inspection (something to do when the aircraft’s out of service) or an annual IPC (another good idea). Maybe you’re making an equipment change soon, or your flying habits will change. Even if everything’s on a steady track for the foreseeable future, a regular checkup of personal limitations and operating ranges is great confirmation that you are indeed getting the most out of your instrument ticket.
https://media.ifrfocus.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/11/31092253/its-personal.png10001250Elaine Kauhhttps://media.ifrfocus.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/07/14115136/IFR-Focus-Logo_White_Blue_Web-01.pngElaine Kauh2025-11-11 08:55:312025-11-04 15:49:02It’s Personal: Managing Your Own Minimums
Think of the flight director as your own personal autopilot coach—it shows you exactly what inputs to make to stay on course and on glidepath. In this IFR Focus video tip, we’ll explain how to interpret those familiar magenta “V-bars,” how they differ from the autopilot, and why mastering the flight director can make your hand-flown approaches smoother and more precise.
https://media.ifrfocus.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/10/29111209/using-the-flight-director.png10001250IFR Focus Teamhttps://media.ifrfocus.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/07/14115136/IFR-Focus-Logo_White_Blue_Web-01.pngIFR Focus Team2025-11-07 08:55:212025-11-05 11:05:21Video Tip: Using the Flight Director
For this inaugural Sim Challenge let’s just make it a nice short flight from White Plains, New York (KHPN) to Danbury, Connecticut (KDXR). At 21nm from start to finish, there isn’t much time for things to go wrong, or much time at all, really. And therein lies the rub. We typically estimate the subjective challenge of a flight to be proportional with the length of the flight. When it comes to weather flying, performance considerations, and fatigue management, there’s certainly something to be said for that.
https://media.ifrfocus.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/10/22122209/ifr-sim-challenge.png10001250Lee Smithhttps://media.ifrfocus.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/07/14115136/IFR-Focus-Logo_White_Blue_Web-01.pngLee Smith2025-11-04 10:00:442025-11-07 09:57:02Sim Challenge: There And Back Again
Departures always require careful planning. Add mountainous terrain, instrument conditions (IMC), or any situation that demands maximum performance from the aircraft, and the stakes become even higher. Factors in departure planning will vary depending on the class of aircraft you’re flying—piston single, twin, jet, etc.—but there are common considerations that all pilots should follow. One cardinal rule is to allow plenty of planning time, consider alternates even in good weather, and accept that the best option may sometimes be to fly another day.
Start with a Sectional Chart and Detailed Imagery
Even for IFR pilots, a Sectional Chart provides a “big picture” view of surrounding terrain and potential obstructions. As the saying goes, a picture is worth a thousand words, and a VFR chart gives you that snapshot. Today, high-resolution aerial imagery and satellite views—available via apps like Google Earth or ForeFlight—offer a realistic sense of terrain, obstacles, and land features. Combined with sectional charts, these tools help you visualize your departure path before you even leave the ground. The Sectional also hints at potential turbulence by showing your departure path’s proximity to higher terrain and how the wind is blowing across ridges. Use this opportunity to identify more hospitable terrain and consider planning your departure in that direction.
Check for Published Departure Procedures
Instrument Departure Procedures (DPs) are preplanned IFR routes that provide obstacle clearance from the terminal area to the en route structure. There are two types of DPs: Obstacle Departure Procedures (ODPs) and Standard Instrument Departures (SIDs).
ODPs are developed to ensure obstacle clearance along the least restrictive route and may be printed either textually or graphically. A graphic ODP will have “(OBSTACLE)” in its title—for example, GEYSR THREE DEPARTURE (OBSTACLE) or CROWN ONE DEPARTURE (RNAV) (OBSTACLE). ODPs are recommended for obstacle clearance and may be flown without ATC clearance, provided no alternate departure (such as a SID or radar vector) has been assigned.
SIDs, on the other hand, are ATC procedures always printed graphically. They not only ensure obstacle clearance but also improve efficiency and reduce controller workload. A SID must be assigned or cleared by ATC before use. Many SIDs and ODPs today are built using RNAV criteria—these are clearly labeled with “RNAV” in the title, such as SHEAD TWO DEPARTURE (RNAV).
All DPs are designed to ensure safe transition from takeoff to the en route phase, but they assume normal aircraft performance. The minimum climb gradient is 200 feet per nautical mile (FPNM), beginning at least 35 feet above runway elevation, with no turns until reaching 400 feet unless otherwise specified. If a DP requires a steeper climb gradient, that will be published, and it’s up to you as PIC to verify your aircraft can meet it.
At some airports, ATC may provide radar vectors during climb within a Diverse Vector Area (DVA)—an area evaluated to ensure obstacle and terrain clearance in lieu of following an ODP or SID.
When an instrument approach is first designed for an airport, the need for a DP is evaluated. If an aircraft can turn in any direction after takeoff and remain clear of obstacles within the assessment area, that runway passes the diverse departure assessment and no ODP is published. If obstacles penetrate the 40:1 surface, however, the procedure designer may publish a specific route, a steeper climb gradient, or higher takeoff minimums to maintain safety.
While not mandatory for Part 91 pilots, flying a DP—especially at night, in marginal VMC, or in IMC—is strongly encouraged. ODPs are one of the simplest, most effective forms of risk management available, particularly in unfamiliar or mountainous terrain.
Planning Departures from Airports Without Published Procedures
At airports without published instrument procedures, ensure you can climb visually to a safe altitude. Use Low Altitude En Route Charts (L-charts) to determine minimum IFR altitudes for obstacle clearance. Minimum En Route Altitudes (MEAs) or Minimum Obstruction Clearance Altitudes (MOCAs) are used on published routes, while Off-Route Obstruction Clearance Altitudes (OROCAs) apply to non-published routing.
When departing an unfamiliar airport, reaching a published route at or above the MEA is generally the safest option, even if it requires a circling climb over the airport. This not only ensures obstacle clearance but also provides reliable navigation and communication coverage with ATC. Published routes often follow more forgiving terrain, giving you more options for contingencies. MOCAs provide obstacle clearance similar to MEAs but guarantee navigation coverage only within 22 nm of the VOR.
If you fly a direct, non-published route, remember that OROCAs are usually higher than published MEAs. They do not guarantee ATC communication, radar or navigation coverage, and they do not account for particularly challenging terrain.
Emergencies Following Departure
Altitudes discussed so far assume normal aircraft performance. If an emergency occurs, aim for the Minimum Safe Altitude (MSA) published on the approach chart. The MSA provides at least 1,000 feet of clearance within a specified distance from the fix upon which the procedure is based. MSAs are often divided into sectors, so confirm during preflight which sector applies based on your intended flight direction. While reviewing the approach chart, look for advisories related to terrain.
Weather Considerations
A thorough weather briefing is imperative, particularly in mountainous regions. Eastern mountains, for example, often have complex weather patterns, including IFR conditions, mountain obscurations, and slow-moving fronts. Turbulence, updrafts, and downdrafts are significant concerns near terrain. Whenever possible, remain upwind of ridges or avoid flying downwind in close proximity. Severe downdrafts can exceed aircraft climb capability; if encountered, visualize the wind pattern and turn toward lower terrain. Don’t hesitate to exercise emergency authority to leave your planned route if conditions deteriorate rapidly. Winds aloft and pilot reports can provide insight into how winds interact with ridges.
Utilize METARs, TAFs, Graphical Forecasts for Aviation, and Forecast Discussions to understand current and forecasted conditions. TAF Forecast Discussions are particularly helpful because forecasters often provide candid remarks about how the report was generated, factors considered, and their confidence in the forecast.
Clearances and Communication
Whenever possible, obtain your clearance on the ground. This reduces in-flight workload and allows you to establish airborne communication and radar contact more efficiently. If you receive a clearance in the air, ensure you can climb to an altitude that guarantees obstacle clearance and maintains communication with ATC. Plan for a published route, even if it adds extra mileage.
Technology and Terrain Awareness
Modern avionics and EFBs provide terrain awareness like never before. Moving maps, overlays, and synthetic vision make it easier to anticipate obstacles, visualize approaches and departures, and maintain situational awareness—even in reduced visibility. Using these tools, especially in mountainous areas, is invaluable for both safety and planning.
Performance, Weight, and Timing
In challenging terrain or conditions, depart as light as possible and build in extra weather margins. This enhances aircraft performance and provides alternatives if things don’t go as planned. Flying earlier in the day is usually preferable to avoid convective activity.
Local Knowledge
Finally, talk to local pilots. FBOs are often a treasure trove of insight unavailable in publications—preferred departure routes, unique ATC procedures, or helpful phrasing for obtaining clearances. Challenging departures are not the time for overconfidence—or for shying away from seeking guidance.
Think you know your IFR charts? In our “Chart Smart” series, we’ll put your instrument knowledge to the test with real examples from approach plates and en route charts—then break down what each symbol really means.
Quiz: Regulations for Instrument Flight Rules
/by Chris ClarkeCan you answer all these regulations questions and stay legal in the IFR system?
Share the quiz to show your results !
Facebook
Facebook
Share your results :
Facebook
Facebook
Twitter
Google+
Try some more quizzes.
Want to brush up on your IFR regulation knowledge? Check out Sporty’s Instrument Rating Course
It’s Personal: Managing Your Own Minimums
/by Elaine KauhThe conditions we accept for a flight – like how low we’ll descend in IMC – are truly personal. Among GA instrument pilots, there’s a wide range of what they’re willing to do, and happily most are respectful of their “personal minimums.” This risk-management system is ubiquitous and now has a larger presence in training standards. It even has its own chapter in an FAA handbook (more on that later). However, in the day-to-day, this doesn’t get the care and feeding it should, and when it does, the methods of use vary just as much as the “minimums” pilots set for themselves.
The wide range of personal minimums isn’t a problem per se – we all differ in our missions, aircraft, and risk tolerance. The problem is that it’s often created as a fill-in-the-blanks document (usually at the prodding of the CFI-I giving an IPC). This soon finds its way to the bottom of the electronic or physical flight bag. Over months or even just weeks, those numbers are forgotten or outdated unless a pilot flies regularly and under similar conditions. Another related issue is that personal minimums are treated as a snapshot of one’s present comfort level, and not as a “proficiency gauge” that requires monitoring and action. Thinking about personal minimums as more of a flight instrument, with ranges and limits, is a better way to check proficiency and, in the end, manage risk.
Limits and Ranges
Minimums are inherently built into the system, so we do pay a lot of attention to what we’d accept for visibility, ceilings, and certain operations like instrument departures. The FAA’s Risk Management Handbook (FAA-H-8083-2A edition) has a chapter on Personal Minimums, offering a step-by-step guide to make your own. This is a great start, especially for those working on the instrument rating. It discusses more than visibility-ceiling considerations, with items like turbulence, terrain, and personal health. We can build on this by viewing minimums as “Limitations” and adding a personal “Operating Range” for your missions.
Start with the Red Line, or Things You Don’t Do. Most of us don’t conduct 0-0 takeoffs even if legal for Part 91 operations (good call). Now: What’s your yellow range, or green? Depends. Say you’re OK flying to approach minimums; you use those for the departure runway in case of an emergency return. Put that together with the estimated ceiling at which you’d break out at the final approach fix to make a “yellow caution range” for a given runway, and weather above that as green. You’ll more carefully consider all the factors before accepting that departure; or maybe this time you want to be in the green arc. This method works for IFR approaches in general.
This mindset applies beyond routine operations. Abnormal or emergency operations can have operating ranges, too. Another common red line: flying to an airport where a circle-to-land at MDA is the only way to get in. Consider your own green arc, even if it has to be clear-and-10. Keep in mind that “never-do” doesn’t mean “never-practice” – in fact, this is something you should practice in safe conditions (under training if need be). Of course, circling approaches are required for an IPC, and it’s a great emergency skill – something you would never do unless, well, you have to.
Quick Poll
Moving Needles
Then, make this part of post-flight routines and carry it into the next pre-flight. When you log flights, include remarks on the vis, ceiling, winds, runway length, approach type, etc. and if you want, email it to yourself and take a look the next day. Was it comfortable on that approach, or were you white-knuckled during vectors? Would you happily do it tomorrow? If no, consider what makes it “yes” and adjust accordingly. It’s likely something will happen eventually that changes your comfort level, brings your attention to a skill gap, or has you gaining confidence flying that long route. This also helps avoid “limit creep,” a common downside to plain-old personal minimums in which landing a knot past your stated crosswind limit can start a trail of complacency. You weren’t suddenly unsafe going from 15 to 16 knots, so 17’s OK…we’d never treat Vne that way. So while respecting the confines of your envelope, watch for trends up or down in your skills over time and make adjustments for the future, not for today’s trip. That’s good risk management.
This approach to personal operating ranges and limitations can also include the flexibility we all want from our flying. Much like aircraft performance varying with weight, altitude, and weather, any particular mission will have custom parameters. You might still have that same weather red line for the next IFR trip, but maybe the green arc is wider since you’re flying with another pilot. Or you agree to fly to a new destination because you’ve tightened up the yellow range for weight to maximize fuel.
The Skill Gauge
Like the circling MDA example, regular training and practice to the highest level of proficiency you can achieve above your personal real-flying envelope will make the best use of those limits. That’s a never-ending process, of course; we’ll never run out of things we need to work on. But why train to approach minimums if we choose not to fly in low weather? First, this automatically widens the risk margin. A big green arc means your IFR comfort level isn’t on the edge, which can only make flying more fun. And it can save your life if something unexpected happens and you’re able to manage that as comfortably as possible.
And it’s built into the requirements for maintaining currency. The FAA’s InFo 15012 on “Logging Instrument Approach Procedures (IAP)” provides guidance on when you can log approaches. One often-overlooked requirement is when practicing in flight under simulated IMC, you must fly to the MDA or DA/DH before going missed or “breaking out.” If traffic or other hazards prevented this but you did fly past the FAF, you can still log it. So in practice, you’re going for maximum proficiency, to the fullest extent of your privileges.
We mentioned “gauge” earlier; think of your skill level as a fuel gauge – decreases in proficiency empty the tank, while solid skills fill it back up. And you don’t want to go empty, or even close to it. The nice system you’ve built now has limits, ranges, and ways to monitor it without making impulsive changes. In addition to post-flight briefings, it’s helpful to review the whole thing on a periodic schedule, such as during your annual inspection (something to do when the aircraft’s out of service) or an annual IPC (another good idea). Maybe you’re making an equipment change soon, or your flying habits will change. Even if everything’s on a steady track for the foreseeable future, a regular checkup of personal limitations and operating ranges is great confirmation that you are indeed getting the most out of your instrument ticket.
Video Tip: Using the Flight Director
/by IFR Focus TeamThink of the flight director as your own personal autopilot coach—it shows you exactly what inputs to make to stay on course and on glidepath. In this IFR Focus video tip, we’ll explain how to interpret those familiar magenta “V-bars,” how they differ from the autopilot, and why mastering the flight director can make your hand-flown approaches smoother and more precise.
Sim Challenge: There And Back Again
/by Lee SmithFor this inaugural Sim Challenge let’s just make it a nice short flight from White Plains, New York (KHPN) to Danbury, Connecticut (KDXR). At 21nm from start to finish, there isn’t much time for things to go wrong, or much time at all, really. And therein lies the rub. We typically estimate the subjective challenge of a flight to be proportional with the length of the flight. When it comes to weather flying, performance considerations, and fatigue management, there’s certainly something to be said for that.
Departure Planning for IFR Pilots: Risk Management Tips
/by Eric RadtkeDepartures always require careful planning. Add mountainous terrain, instrument conditions (IMC), or any situation that demands maximum performance from the aircraft, and the stakes become even higher. Factors in departure planning will vary depending on the class of aircraft you’re flying—piston single, twin, jet, etc.—but there are common considerations that all pilots should follow. One cardinal rule is to allow plenty of planning time, consider alternates even in good weather, and accept that the best option may sometimes be to fly another day.
Start with a Sectional Chart and Detailed Imagery
Even for IFR pilots, a Sectional Chart provides a “big picture” view of surrounding terrain and potential obstructions. As the saying goes, a picture is worth a thousand words, and a VFR chart gives you that snapshot. Today, high-resolution aerial imagery and satellite views—available via apps like Google Earth or ForeFlight—offer a realistic sense of terrain, obstacles, and land features. Combined with sectional charts, these tools help you visualize your departure path before you even leave the ground. The Sectional also hints at potential turbulence by showing your departure path’s proximity to higher terrain and how the wind is blowing across ridges. Use this opportunity to identify more hospitable terrain and consider planning your departure in that direction.
Check for Published Departure Procedures
ODPs are developed to ensure obstacle clearance along the least restrictive route and may be printed either textually or graphically. A graphic ODP will have “(OBSTACLE)” in its title—for example, GEYSR THREE DEPARTURE (OBSTACLE) or CROWN ONE DEPARTURE (RNAV) (OBSTACLE). ODPs are recommended for obstacle clearance and may be flown without ATC clearance, provided no alternate departure (such as a SID or radar vector) has been assigned.
SIDs, on the other hand, are ATC procedures always printed graphically. They not only ensure obstacle clearance but also improve efficiency and reduce controller workload. A SID must be assigned or cleared by ATC before use. Many SIDs and ODPs today are built using RNAV criteria—these are clearly labeled with “RNAV” in the title, such as SHEAD TWO DEPARTURE (RNAV).
All DPs are designed to ensure safe transition from takeoff to the en route phase, but they assume normal aircraft performance. The minimum climb gradient is 200 feet per nautical mile (FPNM), beginning at least 35 feet above runway elevation, with no turns until reaching 400 feet unless otherwise specified. If a DP requires a steeper climb gradient, that will be published, and it’s up to you as PIC to verify your aircraft can meet it.
At some airports, ATC may provide radar vectors during climb within a Diverse Vector Area (DVA)—an area evaluated to ensure obstacle and terrain clearance in lieu of following an ODP or SID.
When an instrument approach is first designed for an airport, the need for a DP is evaluated. If an aircraft can turn in any direction after takeoff and remain clear of obstacles within the assessment area, that runway passes the diverse departure assessment and no ODP is published. If obstacles penetrate the 40:1 surface, however, the procedure designer may publish a specific route, a steeper climb gradient, or higher takeoff minimums to maintain safety.
While not mandatory for Part 91 pilots, flying a DP—especially at night, in marginal VMC, or in IMC—is strongly encouraged. ODPs are one of the simplest, most effective forms of risk management available, particularly in unfamiliar or mountainous terrain.
Planning Departures from Airports Without Published Procedures
At airports without published instrument procedures, ensure you can climb visually to a safe altitude. Use Low Altitude En Route Charts (L-charts) to determine minimum IFR altitudes for obstacle clearance. Minimum En Route Altitudes (MEAs) or Minimum Obstruction Clearance Altitudes (MOCAs) are used on published routes, while Off-Route Obstruction Clearance Altitudes (OROCAs) apply to non-published routing.
When departing an unfamiliar airport, reaching a published route at or above the MEA is generally the safest option, even if it requires a circling climb over the airport. This not only ensures obstacle clearance but also provides reliable navigation and communication coverage with ATC. Published routes often follow more forgiving terrain, giving you more options for contingencies. MOCAs provide obstacle clearance similar to MEAs but guarantee navigation coverage only within 22 nm of the VOR.
If you fly a direct, non-published route, remember that OROCAs are usually higher than published MEAs. They do not guarantee ATC communication, radar or navigation coverage, and they do not account for particularly challenging terrain.
Emergencies Following Departure
Altitudes discussed so far assume normal aircraft performance. If an emergency occurs, aim for the Minimum Safe Altitude (MSA) published on the approach chart. The MSA provides at least 1,000 feet of clearance within a specified distance from the fix upon which the procedure is based. MSAs are often divided into sectors, so confirm during preflight which sector applies based on your intended flight direction. While reviewing the approach chart, look for advisories related to terrain.
Weather Considerations
A thorough weather briefing is imperative, particularly in mountainous regions. Eastern mountains, for example, often have complex weather patterns, including IFR conditions, mountain obscurations, and slow-moving fronts. Turbulence, updrafts, and downdrafts are significant concerns near terrain. Whenever possible, remain upwind of ridges or avoid flying downwind in close proximity. Severe downdrafts can exceed aircraft climb capability; if encountered, visualize the wind pattern and turn toward lower terrain. Don’t hesitate to exercise emergency authority to leave your planned route if conditions deteriorate rapidly. Winds aloft and pilot reports can provide insight into how winds interact with ridges.
Utilize METARs, TAFs, Graphical Forecasts for Aviation, and Forecast Discussions to understand current and forecasted conditions. TAF Forecast Discussions are particularly helpful because forecasters often provide candid remarks about how the report was generated, factors considered, and their confidence in the forecast.
Clearances and Communication
Whenever possible, obtain your clearance on the ground. This reduces in-flight workload and allows you to establish airborne communication and radar contact more efficiently. If you receive a clearance in the air, ensure you can climb to an altitude that guarantees obstacle clearance and maintains communication with ATC. Plan for a published route, even if it adds extra mileage.
Technology and Terrain Awareness
Modern avionics and EFBs provide terrain awareness like never before. Moving maps, overlays, and synthetic vision make it easier to anticipate obstacles, visualize approaches and departures, and maintain situational awareness—even in reduced visibility. Using these tools, especially in mountainous areas, is invaluable for both safety and planning.
Performance, Weight, and Timing
In challenging terrain or conditions, depart as light as possible and build in extra weather margins. This enhances aircraft performance and provides alternatives if things don’t go as planned. Flying earlier in the day is usually preferable to avoid convective activity.
Local Knowledge
Finally, talk to local pilots. FBOs are often a treasure trove of insight unavailable in publications—preferred departure routes, unique ATC procedures, or helpful phrasing for obtaining clearances. Challenging departures are not the time for overconfidence—or for shying away from seeking guidance.
Chart Smart: low altitude IFR enroute chart intersection symbol
/by Eric RadtkeThink you know your IFR charts? In our “Chart Smart” series, we’ll put your instrument knowledge to the test with real examples from approach plates and en route charts—then break down what each symbol really means.