Final Approach Altitude & Radar Vectors
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: ???
Posts: 260
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Final Approach Altitude & Radar Vectors
Is it legal to cross the FAP of an ILS approach below the Final Approach Altitude while being radar vectored?
I personally limit the RoD to capture the glide by the FAP at the latest. However would it be wrong to capture at the cleared altitude.
I don't think so, but I'm prepared to be proven wrong.
Does anyone have a reference.
I personally limit the RoD to capture the glide by the FAP at the latest. However would it be wrong to capture at the cleared altitude.
I don't think so, but I'm prepared to be proven wrong.
Does anyone have a reference.
Join Date: Mar 2013
Location: EU
Posts: 497
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Happens all the time in some places. I'm not aware of anything wrong with it. Terrain clearance is good on the approach and if ATC clears you to 2000' with a 3000' platform, they are taking responsibility for terrain clearance and you'll intercept the glideslope a bit later.
Last edited by OhNoCB; 14th Nov 2015 at 11:23.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: ???
Posts: 260
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
thanks for the replies.
My question really is to do with the quote above. Are we allowed to resume our own Nav down on the glideslope from that point (ie after the FAP)?
I agree that the Min Vectoring altitude can be somewhat lower than the Final Approach Alt. ATC can safely vector you lower than the Final Approach Altitude.
Does that though allow us to commence an ILS approach after the FAP?
Maybe this excerpt from Doc 4444 indirectly provides an answer.
The above could be interpreted to mean: the new FAP (ie the point where the final segment begins) becomes that point on the final approach track where you happen intercept the Glideslope during a radar vectored approach
until the aircraft reaches the point where the pilot will resume own navigation
I agree that the Min Vectoring altitude can be somewhat lower than the Final Approach Alt. ATC can safely vector you lower than the Final Approach Altitude.
Does that though allow us to commence an ILS approach after the FAP?
Maybe this excerpt from Doc 4444 indirectly provides an answer.
9.3.5 The initial and intermediate approach phases of an
approach executed under the direction of a radar controller
comprise those parts of the approach from the time radar
vectoring is initiated for the purpose of positioning the aircraft
for a final approach, until the aircraft is on final approach and:
a) e
established on the final approach path of a pilot-
interpreted aid;
approach executed under the direction of a radar controller
comprise those parts of the approach from the time radar
vectoring is initiated for the purpose of positioning the aircraft
for a final approach, until the aircraft is on final approach and:
a) e
established on the final approach path of a pilot-
interpreted aid;
Join Date: May 2000
Location: Seattle
Posts: 3,195
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
In the US, ATC should not "normally" vector you below the ILS FAF altitude. AIM 5-4-3.c:
HOWEVER, it IS allowed per the definition of the FAF in the Pilot/Controller Glossary:
The pilot is not expected to turn inbound on the final approach course unless an approach clearance has been issued. This clearance will normally be issued with the final vector for interception of the final approach course, and the vector will be such as to enable the pilot to establish the aircraft on the final approach course prior to reaching the final approach fix.
FINAL APPROACH FIX− The fix from which the final approach (IFR) to an airport is executed and which identifies the beginning of the final approach segment. It is designated on Government charts by the Maltese Cross symbol for nonprecision approaches and the lightning bolt symbol for precision approaches; or when ATC directs lower-than-published glideslope/path intercept altitude, it is the resultant actual point of the glideslope/path intercept.
Join Date: Aug 2013
Location: PA
Age: 59
Posts: 30
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
just to throw another issue into the mix....
Countries define FAF and FAP differently...
Adding to your definition Intruder, if ATC gives a lower intercept altitude for the FAF, it becomes a FAP...
The Jepp doc gives a few examples of FAF/FAP per Country..
Countries define FAF and FAP differently...
Adding to your definition Intruder, if ATC gives a lower intercept altitude for the FAF, it becomes a FAP...
The Jepp doc gives a few examples of FAF/FAP per Country..
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: last time I looked I was still here.
Posts: 4,507
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It used to happen quite often at AMS on the southerlies. We're be coming in B757/767 right downwind. The platform is 2000' and it's very flat terrain. Technically MSA was 1700'. There would be a B747 lumbering in on left base for an 8nm finals. ATC would ask if we could accept a short finals and clear us to 1200' and LOC-GS intercept at just under 4nm to avoid a lengthy circuit. No bother; just a question of configuring and speed control to get down. We even did it IMC >CAT 1.
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: In my seat
Posts: 822
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
When under radar vectors, ATC is responsible for terrain clearance, to be crosschecked by the flightcrew obviously...
Last edited by despegue; 17th Nov 2015 at 18:32. Reason: Control = Vectors
Only half a speed-brake
AMS vectors to itercept ILS final at the (already not too distant) FAP or closer to field are good fun. IIRC they are also noted as a factor for the TK crash.
regards, FD.
regards, FD.
Join Date: May 2013
Location: Vietnam
Posts: 1
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
From DOC 8168:
5.4.3 Outer marker/DME fix
5.4.3.1 The final approach area contains a fix or facility that permits verification of the glide path/MLS elevation angle/altimeter relationship. The outer marker or equivalent DME fix is normally used for this purpose. Prior to crossing the fix, descent may be made on the glide path/MLS elevation angle to the altitude/height of the published fix crossing.
5.4.3.2 Descent below the fix crossing altitude/height should not be made prior to crossing the fix.
5.4.3 Outer marker/DME fix
5.4.3.1 The final approach area contains a fix or facility that permits verification of the glide path/MLS elevation angle/altimeter relationship. The outer marker or equivalent DME fix is normally used for this purpose. Prior to crossing the fix, descent may be made on the glide path/MLS elevation angle to the altitude/height of the published fix crossing.
5.4.3.2 Descent below the fix crossing altitude/height should not be made prior to crossing the fix.
Is it legal to cross the FAP of an ILS approach below the Final Approach Altitude while being radar vectored?
I personally limit the RoD to capture the glide by the FAP at the latest. However would it be wrong to capture at the cleared altitude.
I don't think so, but I'm prepared to be proven wrong.
Does anyone have a reference.
I personally limit the RoD to capture the glide by the FAP at the latest. However would it be wrong to capture at the cleared altitude.
I don't think so, but I'm prepared to be proven wrong.
Does anyone have a reference.
The AIP has radar minimum charts for use when under radar vectors if the airport has primary radar cover and ATC provides a radar service. ATCs job is to issue you with clearances according to the radar sector minimums and your job is to accept it when you've confirmed you're safe. If the 25nm MSA is 3000ft, then there is no need to check when you can assure that you're within the MSA sector above a safe altitude. If you are cleared to descend below MSA, it is still your responsibility to check that it is safe according to your Minimum Radar Chart, using conventional means (which could include visual identification of geographic features, but most likely through conventional navaids.
ATC, at least in Europe, will frequently vector you to an intercept inside the FAP so therefore a descent below the platform altitude of the procedure must be issued in order to be able to make the approach (otherwise your only other option is to intercept the approach from above which is obviously undesirable, especially on short finals. You have no other option, this may be due to efficient or crap vectoring. The majority of approaches I've flown in EHAM, EKCH, EDDH and perhaps EGPH will vector inside the FAP consistently. Last one I flew in EHAM had me descending to 1200ft in order to intercept the approach due to some squeaky vectoring, it isn't unusual.
ATC, at least in Europe, will frequently vector you to an intercept inside the FAP so therefore a descent below the platform altitude of the procedure must be issued in order to be able to make the approach (otherwise your only other option is to intercept the approach from above which is obviously undesirable, especially on short finals. You have no other option, this may be due to efficient or crap vectoring. The majority of approaches I've flown in EHAM, EKCH, EDDH and perhaps EGPH will vector inside the FAP consistently. Last one I flew in EHAM had me descending to 1200ft in order to intercept the approach due to some squeaky vectoring, it isn't unusual.
