saintex2002, I agree with all your solutions. Look in practice it's really no big deal and resolved fairly quickly by prompt instruction of ATC. What we were trying to do here was to get to the grounds of the theory nothing more. I wish we in EU had it same clear cut way as the guys overseas but we don't. So taking bits and bytes from here and there we draw conclusions. Every theory has the right to exist till proven wrong. I'll try to put puzzle pieces together daring a POV:
4444 underpins the existence of a valid IAP for the RWY, as we saw earlier, implying consequently a published MAP. The definition of VA implies a partial completion or not completion of IAP. Logically the not completed part would be the final, wouldn't it? We also learned that ICAO doesn't bound MA procedure to the existence of MAP, it's rather a genuine term. It's simply what one has to fly if not able to land as per ICAO. The last stroke is the notion of VA not canceling IFR nor converting it to VFR. Resolving the mystery of dubious spread across definitions it's seems like the published MA remains a valid option. Though as we learned from Mr. heathrow director RV is preferable choice. You've mentioned comm failure on final while visual, haven't you? So what would you fly LH traffic pattern or published comm failure procedure for the RWY in use?
Cheers
