DFC,
Thanks for the info. I can see why you might have to raise the circling minima because of obstacle/missed approach requirements pertinent to the approach you actually use to get to circling MDA and will also use in the event of a missed approach. What I don't understand in this case is that the original approach minima are not as restrictive, e.g. 1,060' for the VOR...
There is the posibility of a pilot at the circling MDA being well north of the final approach track but still being contained within the final approach area for the VOR.
Yes, but in that case he'd be OK* for terrain etc. down to the VOR limit: 1,060'. If he didn't get the required visual references at circling MDA, some 300-600'
above the VOR MDA then he'd have to fly a missed approach. Even the lower of the two possible circling MDAs more than compensates for the increase in required clearances between circling & NPA?
* Not trying to imply he could mix'n'match with the two approaches: below the circling minimum he can only complete a VOR approach or go-around.
I would be more inclined to err on the side of safety and use the more recent higher minima for all circling operations.
You and me both!
I guess you haven't flown many time to CIA or BEG.
No, but there does seem to be a VOR onto RW33 @ CIA - it's classed as circling although as it's <30deg off the RW and <400'/nm it could technically be called a straight-in...
And why would you want to circle at BEG when there's an ILS at both ends?
