Visual Approach Question

[RAPA Pilot]

Hello ATCOs
We called visual and were given(and I cant remember the exact words) track towards right base. So we tracked towards right base and desended to 3000ft. Controller told us off as he hadn't given us a clearance for a visual approach so we shouldnt have descended. Fare enough hands up our mistake.

Then again the other day controller says cleared for the visual approach, I remembered my mistake from before and after a little thought I asked if we were clear to descend, No maintain altitude I'll call you. So we tracked towards the final approach track. After a minute we were given, Cleared unrestricted visual approach and in we went, no problem.

So my question is what should the clearence be? Cleared visual approach(altitude is still the ATCOs) or Cleared unrestricted visual approach (so altitude is mine)?

Sorry if this is a bit boring but both of us(experience crew) would like to know the answer in case something is missing in our training or theirs for that matter!!! And I can advise our other crew for future reference.

Cheers

RAPA.

[Crazy Voyager]

I can't give you a 100% answer since I'm no ATCO myself, but if you listen to around where I live it usually sounds like this:
"cleared for visual approach runway 01, maintain 2000 feet until established on final approach track".

I don't belive I've ever heard some other version anyhow, but then visual approaches aren't wery common around where I live due to noise abatment (which is also as I understand it why the "maintain 2000 feet" restriction is there).

But from my perspective, I would expect "cleared visual approach" to mean that the pilot is allowed to descend unless a restriction is given above. But then again, I'm no ATCO or pilot (I'm just one of the people giving the ATC selection process a try).

[spekesoftly]

I would expect "cleared visual approach" to mean that the pilot is allowed to descend unless a restriction is given ..... Correct :ok:

[RAPA Pilot]

'I would expect "cleared visual approach" to mean that the pilot is allowed to descend unless a restriction is given.'

Exactly as I thought, so unless a conditional clearance is given where does
'cleared unrestricted visual approach' come from when no condition was origially given???

[Wojtus]

Approach is approach, it includes descend to ground.

where does 'cleared unrestricted visual approach' come from when no condition was origially given???
Poor phraseology - probably they are used to give restricted ones first. For example, approach may need to call tower for clearance inside CTR.

[mirage3]

When given 'cleared visual approach', this authorises the pilot to fly the route authorised until 5NM (generally continuing to the azimuth aid such as NDB, VOR etc) while descending in VMC and to then at 5NM adjust track as required to set up for the approach for landing. In some cases, the Controller may say 'cleared visual approach, track as required for (left base, final etc)'. This allows flexibility when the 5NM restriction may make it very tight in later manouevres (such as left base runway 29 at Darwin Australia). Hope this helps.

[RAPA Pilot]

When given 'cleared visual approach', this authorises the pilot to fly the route authorised until 5NM (generally continuing to the azimuth aid such as NDB, VOR etc) while descending in VMC and to then at 5NM adjust track as required to set up for the approach for landing.

Sorry Mirage 3, I haven't got a clue what you are talking about I realy haven't.
What authorised route?
Track to a beacon, why?
Whats 5 miles got to do with anything?

Sorry mate. Perhaps you do something different down under!!!!

[Canoehead]

Once a controller issues a visual approach (provided the pilot has reported either the airport or traffic to follow in sight) the ONLY restriction to the pilot is noise abatement.

At times, a controller may include a restriction within the visual approach clearance, such as "not below 2000' until final" or "turn final no closer than 6 miles". For non-local pilots, he may even include noise abatement restrictions within the visual approach, such as "cleared visual, not below 3000 until over the lake"

In the example given in the first post, where the controller says 'track towards right base' the aircraft is still either on radar vectors or some form of IFR navigation, and hasn't been issued a visual just yet. So 'track towards right base' is ambiguous at best, and as a pilot I would definitely stay at my last assigned altitude.

[Water Wings]

We called visual and were given(and I cant remember the exact words)

Saying you are "visual" is very different to using the words "request visual approach." Where I am, the pilot must specifically request (and be cleared for) the visual approach. Even the other day I heard a pilot call visual and in the next breath is asking where is his visual approach clearance. Could this be where the confusion comes from?

[Glamdring]

I use either... "Cleared visual approach RW24, no descent restriction" or "Cleared visual approach RW24, maintain 3000' until cleared".

[throw a dyce]

A similar system as developed at my old unit.Due to the large amount of VFR traffic below 2000ft,the Radar controller had to co-ordinate every visual with the Tower.The answer could be varied as radar see it past my VFR traffic,route to a 5 mile final ,or no restriction.The phraseology that developed was cleared visual approach not below 3000ft.When the IFR was clear of the VFR then we said no descent restriction.
I tended to say to an IFR wanting a visual,just standby.Co-ordinate with Tower and then cleared visual approach,no descent restriction or whatever Tower wanted.The descent restriction isn't standard R/T,but if you missed it out the pilot would ask.It also cleared up confusion.

[Blockla]

In the Oz AIP (quotes below may be a little old) if a pilot reports visual then it's an indication to the ATC that they can make a visual approach, however for "International Heavy"'s they must specifically "Request Visual Approach" to be cleared for one. (Excluding Sydney parallel ops)

As for tracking (day time ops):

Tracking Requirements. Tracking requirements for a visual approach include the following:
a. A pilot in command must maintain track/heading on the route progressively authorised by ATC until:
(1) within 5NM of the aerodrome; This means continue to follow the heading to final if outside 5NM or the STAR you were flying etc until 5NM. Once inside 5NM you can do what you want unless you were told to do something specifically by the ATC (ie track to a 3 mile final Cleared Visual Approach runway 23)

As for altitude:

11.5.5 Minimum Altitude Requirements. During the conduct of a visual approach, a pilot must descend as necessary to:
a. by day:
(1) for an IFR flight, remain not less than 500FT above the lower limit of the CTA; and
(2) for IFR and VFR flights, operate not below the lowest altitude permissible for VFR flight (CAR 157). So unless specifically instructed you are able to descend as you wish as long as you stay in CTA (plus buffer) and also avoid 'buzzing' houses etc.

There is no such thing as an "unrestricted" visual approach; it's either a visual approach (which is unrestricted unless otherwise specified) or it's a visual approach with (altitude or tracking) restrictions.

[supraspinatus]

At my unit we have a lot of VFR-traffic, therefore the standard VA clearance will always be: "XXX123 Cleared visual approach RWY YY, descend 2000 feet"
Next call would be the transfer to TWR.

Then TWR might want to keep the restriction: "XXX123 maintain 2000ft until established on final" or "XXX123 descent unrestricted"

Last year we had quite a few levelbust because pilots did not understand why they got the levelrestriction on VA. This year there is a lot fewer of these incidents due to increased focus on preventing level busts.

[Blockla]

I use either... "Cleared visual approach RW24, no descent restriction" or "Cleared visual approach RW24, maintain 3000' until cleared".This seems a bit strange to me, why are you clearing an approach but then not enabling descent to the ground; would it not be better practice to say descend to 3000 feet and give tracking as required (or as you need); eg "fly heading 260, expect visual approach, maintain 3000' or 'track for final, expect visual approach, maintain 3000' etc; and then later clear the aircraft for the VSA; because in your second scenario you have to transmit again anyway.

Additionally if you say "no descent restriction" this may imply doubt about what the VSA means... It means unrestricted unless otherwise specified. (or does it)?

[HEATHROW DIRECTOR]

I don't know what "VSA" means...???

I can't believe that this thread has gone on so long. If a pilot reports that he has the runway in sight and wishes to continue with a Visal Approach, he may be so cleared. You cannot legislate for every situation so, at the time, ATC may impose other restrictions. There surely can't be any more to discuss?

[GAPSTER]

...experience tells me not to put too much money on it:)

[Sonnendec]

When i issue a clearance for a visual approach i expect the pilot to complete this type of approach. I mean, one thing is something like: "proceed to right base", which doesn´t imply a clearance to descend, and on the other hand "cleared for visual approach" DOES imply a full completion of the procedure at pilots discretion.

Anyway, you can always ask if you are not sure about any clearance.

Best regards.

[RAPA Pilot]

oooh Can of worms!!!

I don't know what VSA is either.

On the occasion that we descended when we were not cleared i.e "track to right base" surely it would be up to us as to where we wanted to join the final approach track in terms of distance from the threshhold, no vector was given after all, and the shorter the distance the lower we would need to be(no noise abatement here) Perhaps the ATCO should have said, "Track to right base maintain 3000ft and establish on a 6 mile final" then once traffic permitted he could then give "cleared visual approach" so now if I havent made it to the six mile final position I can do what I like and cut in short.

Anyway all I realy wanted to know was, was "cleared unrestricted visual approach" standard terminology and I think you have answered my question.

Thanks water wings, from now on I will ensure no ambiguity and say "requesting visual approach"

Thanks for the replies.

[Blockla]

VSA = Visual Approach...

[OA32]

This is one of my pet hates, a few of my fellow controllers clear a/c for a visual approach but give a restriction, which in my mind leads to more confusion. If you can't clear them for the visual approach without a restriction then say something else. ie own navigation right/left base runway 09 maintain 3000' until advised. then say cleared for the visual approach when the confliction no longer exists. On many occasions I have had pilots come back and ask me if they can descend or if it's un-restricted because of the confusion caused by other controllers not using correct phraseology. At best this leads to more r/t time at worst this could lead to something more dangerous occuring.

If you are cleared for the visual approach in the UK then you can descend and navigate at your discretion subject to noise abatement. The only restriction that should be given in conjunction with it relates to traffic, ie ' (Insert Callsign) cleared visual approach nbr (2) following the (737) (caution wake turbulence recommended distance is ... miles)

OA32

[spekesoftly]

The only restriction that should be given in conjunction with it relates to traffic ............


From UK CAA CAP493 (MATS Part 1) Section 2 Chapter 3 Page 5 Para 9.8 :-

"When an aircraft is cleared for a visual approach the clearance must include, where appropriate, a descent restriction that will ensure that the aircraft remains within controlled airspace."

[OA32]

Quote:
The only restriction that should be given in conjunction with it relates to traffic ............

From UK CAA CAP493 (MATS Part 1) Section 2 Chapter 3 Page 5 Para 9.8 :-

"When an aircraft is cleared for a visual approach the clearance must include, where appropriate, a descent restriction that will ensure that the aircraft remains within controlled airspace."

Quite right spekesoftly, I stand corrected and should have double checked the MATS 1 before posting. In my defence it is not usually an issue where I work.

[HEATHROW DIRECTOR]

CAS wasn't a problem where I worked, but lots of helicopters under the approach were, hence an altitude restriction was sometimes applied to provide standard separation as required from other IFR and/or SVFR traffic.