if you drop out of cloud at 600ft AGL (minimum) you will have trouble lining up and being stable (unless your company allows for lower than 500ft stable approaches).
Visually I normally knock the approach off at the FAF and track straight ahead until on center line.
RM, in reality, a lot of NPAs do just this: a VOR, for example, is very rarely aligned. Alpha Centauri will correct me, but I think that the offset angle is designed to put you on or near the CL (ie crossing it) at or near the MDA. One simple turn onto the CL. That approach has an MDA of over 580ft, so it would be similar to doing a VOR if the VOR site was located NNE of the field. RNAVs even conveniently show you where the turn-to-runway CL is:
at Mike. Mike is at around 200ft AGL (0.8nm) which is closer than a VOR but that is probably due to the tracking accuracy. If you popped out at 600ft, you'd have over a mile/20+seconds to continue tracking across to the CL: do not turn straight to it otherwise you
will get tangled up.
As for the Stab Approach criteria, these were of course "created" for straight-ins. Enlightened operators had lower limits to cater for NPAs/circling. Now that we are all beholden to the FSF 1000ft/500ft guidelines, exceptions have to be, have been and should be written in to your company rules to allow for such approaches with late turns onto the CL. Try doing a circuit when you have to be stable at 1000ft...
Get out there when AMCS' mates do their route-proving and give us a report on how they go!
