My concern is that you either are not aware of what the regulations say or have either misinterpreted it or have had it inappropriately explained to you.
Thank you for your concern. I know the regulations very well. The thing is, not the whole word is flying FAA rules (in fact there the world is pretty big outside USA, which many Americans are too self-centered to recognize).
Circling definitions according to ICAO:
Visual manoeuvring (circling), 7.2.2
After initial visual contact, the basic assumption is that the runway environment should be kept in sight while at minimum descent altitude/height (MDA/H) for circling. The runway environment includes features such as the runway threshold or approach lighting aids or other markings identifiable with the runway.
As you can see, it is the
runway that should be kept in visual contact. Not airport surroundings. Neither does it say that the Pilot Flying, should be the one to keep the runway in sight, for multi pilot airplanes.
I (and any other pilot with a license that I know) would expect to be able to see an identifiable part of the airport on which I expect to land.
If you are on downwind, 1 nm past the threshold, still going in the opposite direction, you will not able to fly with reference to the runway. Navigate, yes - aviate, no. And it is not a requirement either. The purpose of keeping the runway in sight is the ensure that you remain within obstacle protected area.
If flying in IMC conditions of 2400 meter (1.5 sm), 600 feet cloud base, rain and at night, I prefer to aviate according to my ADI. If you want to look over your shoulder while screaming YEEEHAAA, then good luck and I wish you lot of fun flying the missed approach when you inadvertently climb 50 feet back into the could base.
Here is what EU-OPS has to say:
OPS 1.435 - Terminology
“Circling”. The visual phase of an instrument approach to bring an aircraft into position for landing on a runway which is not suitably located for a straight-in approach.
What you describe....
The understanding is that if the pilot knows what is seen on that airport, and knows the location of both what is seen AND the runway on that airport, there will be sufficient information to continue to fly toward where the airplane will be safely aligned with the runway to complete a safe approach and landing.
...and...
…and that is why the regulation does not require that the pilot continually maintain visual contact with the runway – only that the pilot maintain visual contact with an identifiable part of the airport
...is in Europe called a Visual Approach:
OPS 1.435 Terminology
“Visual approach”. An approach when either part or all of an instrument approach procedure is not completed and the approach is executed with visual reference to the terrain.
Here is is no requirement to have the runway in sight, as long as you can find your way with other identifiable terrain features (e.g. follow a coastline that leads to the airport). Hence you fly it looking out the window, and I don't time those either.
It has by way has a minimum RVR of 800 meter / 0.5 sm (much to my amusement when reading the usual uproar from American colleagues).
OPS 1.430 Aerodrome operating minima
(g) Visual Approach. An operator shall not use an RVR of less than 800 m for a visual approach.
So to return to your original concern:
My concern is that you either are not aware of what the regulations say or have either misinterpreted it or have had it inappropriately explained to you.
...maybe it is time that you do some brushing up on your knowledge of international rules and regulations? Especially, if you want to comment with authority on an international (UK based) pilot forum and especially when answering a question from a poster (Screwballs) who is based in the UK...
(And yes, I don't care how many hours you have... eating a meal and taking a nap 5000 times over the Atlantic doesn't really make anyone an expert in circling approaches).