It seems I found references guys, will copy copy/paste them here, it seems we were right.
But first of all I would like to share that in my company visual approaches are allowed both day and night, plus we didn’t want to fly anything illegal, neither do something unsafe. My question was regarding the legality of the decision.
So here we are:
Circling approach definition (ICAO PANS-OPS doc 7168)
Circling approach. An extension of an instrument approach procedure which provides for visual circling of the aerodrome prior to landing.
Visual approach definition (ICAO ATM manual doc 4444)
Visual approach. An approach by an IFR flight when either part or all of an instrument approach procedure is not completed and the approach is executed in visual reference to terrain.
6.5.3 Visual approach LIDO users look General 1.6.4.1.8
6.5.3.1 Subject to the conditions in 6.5.3.3, clearance for an IFR flight to execute a visual approach may be requested by a flight crew or initiated by the controller. In the latter case, the concurrence of the flight crew shall be required.
6.5.3.2 Controllers shall exercise caution in initiating a visual approach when there is reason to believe that the flight crew concerned is not familiar with the aerodrome and its surrounding terrain. Controllers should also take into consideration the prevailing traffic and meteorological conditions when initiating visual approaches.
6.5.3.3 An IFR flight may be cleared to execute a visual approach provided the pilot can maintain visual reference to the terrain and:
a) the reported ceiling is at or above the approved initial approach level for the aircraft so cleared; or
b) the pilot reports at the initial approach level or at any time during the instrument approach procedure that the meteorological conditions are such that with reasonable assurance a visual approach and landing can be completed
Cyclone733, it seems that a circling and a visual approach are 2 different things in terms of air law. Practically could be the same (but not always), but may not for a pilot, depending on the airport, and with some variability in different flown altitudes.
As for your assumptions about why RNAV 35 doenst have circling is beyond my question, they said that they are going to implement soon RNAV for 17!
Of course we would “circle” the same way as we would fly a close “visual pattern”.
Rak64, yes, Kerkira!
Flyingstone, it seems that 6.5.3.3 b) paragraph sorts it clearly. Yes you can
“break” anytime, even below, assuming the conditions are met.
Of course 6.5.3.2 is a good reason for ATC do deny any visual approach. But i have flown many visual approaches there.
763Jock, LIDO takes minimums from the authorities and fits them there. If they don’t publish circling minima, LIDO will not. But there are circling minima for VOR W 35 as you can see. So there is not something extraordinary to fly a pattern to the east. Nice point through the minima for visual approach, my company has the same criteria with 6.5.3.3 but also RVR has to be not less than 800m. (EASA CAT OP MPA 110) Now that’s very low but should be there for legislative reasons plus the possibility of shallow fog. To fly such a pattern with comfort you need at least 5-6 kilometers of visibility. Check also LIDO General 1.6.8.16 and 1.7.3.5 and don’t confuse VFR minima with Visual approaches, totally different story.
Gravityfighter, sure, that’s why I discuss it. If ATC doesn’t approve it, I cant execute it neither. But my question was towards if my idea had a legal application, and it does. We discussed very politely with ATC later on. But the idea of circling and visual pattern being treated the same by ATC got me surprised. Its not the same thing.
RVF750, yes mate, Greece has many very challenging NPA’s.
Capt Scribble, that’s right.
Leadsled, I don’t know which rules you are referring to, but in Europe you don’t have to keep VMC/VFR minima to execute a visual, however its your responsibility to stay in visual contact and stay out of cloud. Thats how i at least understand it.