Cleared for visual approach into a big airport...

[prisoner24601]

A couple of questions to ask. I fly for a none US airline. We are always given cleared for localiser and then when runway in sight, cleared for a visual.

1) What is the likelyhood of ATC turning the localiser and glideslope off - we are technically visual so I don't see any reason why they cannot do this without warning.

2) In the event of a go-around the ILS standard missed approach is not valid as we are on a visual approach. What do ATC expect? I don't seen anything written down in our company manuals.

Thanks in advance for the replies.

[raysalmon]

1. Very unlikely to be turned off unless they are out of service for technical reasons. ATC knows we use them as a backup and they like it, especially when running parallel approaches.

2. ATC expects you to follow the instructions they give you if you go around. Very few major airports will want you to fly the published missed approach, even in IMC unless you lose radio comms. In that case if you're on a visual approach, and you need to go around and you lose radio comms (super bad day), you're supposed to use your best judgment. I would squawk 7600, fly a visual pattern/circuit and land with a steady green light from the tower.

[B2N2]

The USA is not a third world country, not yet at least.
Nav aids don't get turned off simply because a controller feels like it.
I'm too lazy to look it up right now but there's a couple of things you accept responsibility for when you accept a 'Visual clearance'.
Airport in sight yadayadayada all that jazz.
If you're not comfortable then do not accept the Visual approach clearance.
It's done to make the controllers life easier, not yours.

[galaxy flyer]

True, but it does make my life as a pilot easier, too. It always amuses me how pilots from outside the US are buffaloed by "the visual"--it's easy, fly the plane to the runway.

GF

[mgahan]

Might be slightly off topic but in the "good old days" one of the more interesting and challenging exam questions in Australia was: "List the restrictions placed on a pilot by issue of the instruction "MAKE VISUAL APPROACH"."

Opened a few eyes in both the cockpit and control tower.

MJG

[MarcK]

Taking KSFO as an example, visual approaches are partially for noise abatement (keeps you higher) and allows for simultaneous approaches to 28R and 28L. The visual approach charts have a "default" missed approach procedure.

[Spooky 2]

MarcK, that might be true for KSFO but at KPDX there are published visuals that do not have published a MAP, so if nothing else, the FAA remains confusing...as usual:)

[AtoBsafely]

The most significant point is when you accept the visual, YOU are responsible for separation from preceding traffic. Whilst on the IFR approach ATC is responsible for separating you from other traffic.
Regarding a go around, expect instructions to be issued when you report "XX going around". Typically 1500-2000', and a heading assigned. We set the IFR published missed approach, and then change it to fit the ATC instruction.

[haughtney1]

My only gripe is when ATC throw a late runway change at you...or worse want a sidestep in close, I think a lot of the controllers forget that lots of us don't have the luxury of flying visuals on a regular basis, it's also not quite as simple (particularly if your not expecting it..or you've been airborne for 14hrs) to change everything up, if I was in a CRJ sure, a 737 probably, but not in my 777:=
The other missing element is familiarity, I fly to the US probably 6-10 times a year, and to 8 different airports...I'm lucky if I see a place once a year, it can make it a challenge!

[MarkerInbound]

There's a difference between a "visual approach" and a "Charted Visual Flight Procedure." For a visual approach the weather has to be VMC and you have to see the airport or traffic to follow. Other than that, you're on your own. If you do have to go around, you tell the tower you're going around and they tell you what to do. From paragraph 5-4-23 in the AIM -

"e. A visual approach is not an IAP and therefore has no missed approach segment. If a go around is necessary for any reason, aircraft operating at controlled airports will be issued an appropriate advisory/clearance/instruction by the tower."

CVFPs have higher weather mins based on the minimum vectoring altitude. MarcK, I don't see your "default missed approach procedure." Both the QUIET BRIDGE and TIPP TOE visual charts for SFO, along with the SEWARD and HIGHWAY visuals in ANC and the PARKWAY visual in JFK (the Canarsie) all say "No missed approach procedure" on the chart. And per paragraph 5-4-24 of the AIM, "CVFPs are not instrument approaches and do not have missed approach segments."

[FlightDetent]

The most significant point is when you accept the visual, YOU are responsible for separation from preceding traffic. as well from that point on, wake turbulence rules no longer apply. :E

[ethicalconundrum]

1. Highly, extremely unlikely, but if it happens, you are now visual, and all the requirements for separation and spacing are on you. An example of how this can go pear shaped is the accident in San Diego with PSA vs Cessna.

2. Advise on your go around; 'bugsmasher flight 1234, going around, we are visual VMC, say instructions' and then follow those instructions. If tower issued the 'cleared for visual' and you accepted, then tower is resp for your nav. Same with appr. Only thing I would caution is if you can't remain VMC, let someone know that you are unable to accept a vector/alt that will put you IMC. Do NOT go IMC without a clearance and readback. You accepted 'visual' flight rules - stick to them(unless contact with ground is imminent, then use your head).

[Amadis of Gaul]

My only gripe is when ATC throw a late runway change at you...or worse want a sidestep in close, I think a lot of the controllers forget that lots of us don't have the luxury of flying visuals on a regular basis, it's also not quite as simple (particularly if your not expecting it..or you've been airborne for 14hrs) to change everything up, if I was in a CRJ sure, a 737 probably, but not in my 777:=
The other missing element is familiarity, I fly to the US probably 6-10 times a year, and to 8 different airports...I'm lucky if I see a place once a year, it can make it a challenge!

Just like any other clearance, if you're not comfortable with it (as with a sidestep close in), don't accept it. My personal policy is no sidesteps below 1,000' AGL (that would be against our stabilized approach criteria), and no sidestep at all, if it wasn't briefed. I'm paid by the minute, I'll gladly go around and make a few more bucks.

[misd-agin]

777's can switch runways as easily as a smaller jet. It's the carpenter...

[haughtney1]

777's can switch runways as easily as a smaller jet. It's the carpenter...

Misd I don't disagree, and in reference to the US, many of the parallel runways are by design a lot closer together than later designed and constructed airports. The issue is as I've said, when you aren't expecting it, it's a challenge and a threat, it's also worth remembering operating manuals differ greatly, I cannot sidestep below 1500 AAL as where I work that's considered an unstable (unsafe) approach...even if it's perfectly possible and reasonable to do so for someone else.
To be fair to ATC in the US, they give a lot more leeway to foreign operators and in my experience they help far more than hinder, but just as it can be a struggle for foreigners in the US, there's many a time I've watched and heard a delta, American or a Connie mess up something that to me seems a perfectly simple and reasonable thing to do.....so it's more the wood you are given to work with..not the carpenter my friend.

[casablanca]

It may seem funny but technically per our SOP's we are not allowed to do visual unless there are no other options and we have very strict stabilization criteria...with FOQA they download 100 percent of all the flights data so when offered a sidestep I have to kindly refuse as I have handful of kids counting on me.
Visuals can still be backed up by an ils so besides MAP/ and now being responsible for own separation and wake avoidance not really big deal...
Even then one can say airport not in sight. ( have to admit the most mistakes I've seen have been at the home based airport where people maybe are little too over confident )

[Zaphod Beblebrox]

In the US the "Visual Approaches" and "Go-Arounds" are covered by the Airman's Information manual Section 5−4−23. Visual Approach

e. A visual approach is not an IAP and therefore
has no missed approach segment. If a go around is
necessary for any reason, aircraft operating at
controlled airports will be issued an appropriate
advisory/clearance/instruction by the tower. At
uncontrolled airports, aircraft are expected to remain
clear of clouds and complete a landing as soon as
possible. If a landing cannot be accomplished, the
aircraft is expected to remain clear of clouds and
contact ATC as soon as possible for further clearance.
Separation from other IFR aircraft will be maintained
under these circumstances.

When you do a "go-around" from a visual, for any reason, the ball is immediately in ATC's court and they must issue an appropriate clearance. As to the first part of the question, the controllers are not simply going to turn off the ILS or other approach aids. A visual may be accepted if you are following another aircraft and do not yet have the airport in sight.

[filejw]

It may seem funny but technically per our SOP's we are not allowed to do visual unless there are no other options and we have very strict stabilization criteria...with FOQA they download 100 percent of all the flights data so when offered a sidestep I have to kindly refuse as I have handful of kids counting on me.
Visuals can still be backed up by an ils so besides MAP/ and now being responsible for own separation and wake avoidance not really big deal...
Even then one can say airport not in sight. ( have to admit the most mistakes I've seen have been at the home based airport where people maybe are little too over confident )

Dam that is very sad..........:ugh:

[misd-agin]

Details matter - distance to runway, lateral offset of parallel ruwnway, etc. Certain airports have closely spaced parallel runways, others don't.

Stabilized requirements drive the lowest acceptable altitude, and distance to the runway, where a runway switch is acceptable.

I'd estimate that 2000', on glide slope, is about the lowest/nearest point to accept a last minute runway change.

[dogtired]

https://youtu.be/4zjRQ47rutg