Narrative:

Flight was to land at cgx to drop off 2 passenger. WX conditions were reported as an estimated 800 ft overcast, 5 mi visibility in fog. Chicago approach controllers were queried about previous aircraft getting into cgx using the shore visual approach runway 36 since cgx has no IAP. I was informed by approach and mdy tower controllers that aircraft had gotten into cgx. Approach vectored us for the mdy runway 31C ILS, which we flew to approximately 1600 ft MSL. Upon breaking out and being able to maintain VFR at 1400- 1600 ft MSL we canceled IFR as per shore visual runway 36 instructions. Midway tower provided a right 90 degree heading to clear their approach and then direct to cgx. We received special VFR clearance at or below 1500 ft MSL from cgx and proceeded to complete the flight with a normal visual landing. However, the whole approach brought several questions and concerns to my mind: 1) if the approach from mdy to cgx is not considered a landing approach, the minimum safe altitude far's were violated (1000 ft above obstacles within 2000 ft radius). Yet, controllers instructed flight at or below 1500 ft MSL. 2) the visual approach from gary, in, is much safer, flying lake michigan shoreline from gary to cgx, yet was not used by ATC. In future, I will not accept the visual approach using mdy approach on runway 31C ILS. Instead, I will ask for gary, in, and shoreline approach. This has no obstacles and therefore is much safer. I was too busy to sort all this out on the approach to mdy runway 31C, and then during the visual approach to cgx. I allowed controllers to 'fly' the plane instead of being assertive and requesting the gary visual approach.

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: PLT OF AN SMA SEL IS CONCERNED ABOUT THE LEGAL MINIMUM SAFE ALT WHEN TRANSITIONING FROM INST APCH PROC TO A VISUAL APCH TO ANOTHER NEARBY CTLED ARPT OVER A CONGESTED CITY!

Narrative: FLT WAS TO LAND AT CGX TO DROP OFF 2 PAX. WX CONDITIONS WERE RPTED AS AN ESTIMATED 800 FT OVCST, 5 MI VISIBILITY IN FOG. CHICAGO APCH CTLRS WERE QUERIED ABOUT PREVIOUS ACFT GETTING INTO CGX USING THE SHORE VISUAL APCH RWY 36 SINCE CGX HAS NO IAP. I WAS INFORMED BY APCH AND MDY TWR CTLRS THAT ACFT HAD GOTTEN INTO CGX. APCH VECTORED US FOR THE MDY RWY 31C ILS, WHICH WE FLEW TO APPROX 1600 FT MSL. UPON BREAKING OUT AND BEING ABLE TO MAINTAIN VFR AT 1400- 1600 FT MSL WE CANCELED IFR AS PER SHORE VISUAL RWY 36 INSTRUCTIONS. MIDWAY TWR PROVIDED A R 90 DEG HDG TO CLR THEIR APCH AND THEN DIRECT TO CGX. WE RECEIVED SPECIAL VFR CLRNC AT OR BELOW 1500 FT MSL FROM CGX AND PROCEEDED TO COMPLETE THE FLT WITH A NORMAL VISUAL LNDG. HOWEVER, THE WHOLE APCH BROUGHT SEVERAL QUESTIONS AND CONCERNS TO MY MIND: 1) IF THE APCH FROM MDY TO CGX IS NOT CONSIDERED A LNDG APCH, THE MINIMUM SAFE ALT FAR'S WERE VIOLATED (1000 FT ABOVE OBSTACLES WITHIN 2000 FT RADIUS). YET, CTLRS INSTRUCTED FLT AT OR BELOW 1500 FT MSL. 2) THE VISUAL APCH FROM GARY, IN, IS MUCH SAFER, FLYING LAKE MICHIGAN SHORELINE FROM GARY TO CGX, YET WAS NOT USED BY ATC. IN FUTURE, I WILL NOT ACCEPT THE VISUAL APCH USING MDY APCH ON RWY 31C ILS. INSTEAD, I WILL ASK FOR GARY, IN, AND SHORELINE APCH. THIS HAS NO OBSTACLES AND THEREFORE IS MUCH SAFER. I WAS TOO BUSY TO SORT ALL THIS OUT ON THE APCH TO MDY RWY 31C, AND THEN DURING THE VISUAL APCH TO CGX. I ALLOWED CTLRS TO 'FLY' THE PLANE INSTEAD OF BEING ASSERTIVE AND REQUESTING THE GARY VISUAL APCH.

Data retrieved from NASA's ASRS site as of July 2007 and automatically converted to unabbreviated mixed upper/lowercase text. This report is for informational purposes with no guarantee of accuracy. See NASA's ASRS site for official report.