Quick RTF question
Thread Starter
Joined: Apr 2006
Posts: 119
Likes: 2
From: Somewhere
Quick RTF question
Phraseology for asking pilots if they wish a visual approach.
I can't find anything specific, I use "Report if you wish to contine visually" but I see ICAO now says "ADVISE ABLE TO ACCEPT VISUAL APPROACH RUNWAY (number)"
I found a "report visual" but nothing else.
Just wondering if anyone knows the definitive answer.
Cheers
I can't find anything specific, I use "Report if you wish to contine visually" but I see ICAO now says "ADVISE ABLE TO ACCEPT VISUAL APPROACH RUNWAY (number)"
I found a "report visual" but nothing else.
Just wondering if anyone knows the definitive answer.
Cheers
Joined: Jun 2006
Posts: 20
Likes: 0
From: Scotland
Quick RTF QUESTION
1.3.3 On occasions IFR aircraft do not complete the instrument approach procedure but request permission to make a visual approach.
G-AB over KTN 3000 feet field in
sight, request visual approach
G-AB cleared visual approach
runway 28 QFE 1008
Cleared visual approach runway 28
QFE 1008 G-AB
CAP413
Chapter 6 Page 5
Essentially the PILOT must request a Visual Approach and NOT be offered one.
sight, request visual approach
G-AB cleared visual approach
runway 28 QFE 1008
Cleared visual approach runway 28
QFE 1008 G-AB
CAP413
Chapter 6 Page 5
Essentially the PILOT must request a Visual Approach and NOT be offered one.
Thread Starter
Joined: Apr 2006
Posts: 119
Likes: 2
From: Somewhere
1.3.3 On occasions IFR aircraft do not complete the instrument approach procedure but request permission to make a visual approach.
G-AB over KTN 3000 feet field in
sight, request visual approach
G-AB cleared visual approach
runway 28 QFE 1008
Cleared visual approach runway 28
QFE 1008 G-AB
sight, request visual approach
G-AB cleared visual approach
runway 28 QFE 1008
Cleared visual approach runway 28
QFE 1008 G-AB
CAP413
Chapter 6 Page 5
Chapter 6 Page 5
Essentially the PILOT must request a Visual Approach and NOT be offered one.
Yes I agree with your "essentially" comment, as per MATS Part 1 and CAP413, but now it seems that ICAO does have a phrase for it.
I am sure we all have our own ways of finding out whether the pilot does want to continue visually or not, even though we, as controllers are not supposed to push it on them. Maybe this is why so many people have looked at this thread but not answered it! Is this still one of those dark areas of air traffic that we don't want to talk about?
Joined: Jun 2006
Posts: 20
Likes: 0
From: Scotland
Quick RTF Question
FLIGHT OPERATIONS DEPARTMENT COMMUNICATION - 14/2004
Have a quick look at this, you may be right, with all the limitations perhaps the vagaries of a visual approach are not fully understood or perhaps they are just a little difficult to fully implement? I suspect this thread will see many more replies as everyone chips in their bit.
Also see ATSIN 94 2006
Last edited by VATCO; 5th December 2006 at 23:09. Reason: Stopped Shouting for Vintage ATCO
Joined: Oct 1999
Posts: 2,212
Likes: 0
From: Anywhere
A phrase I would only use for VFR traffic - unlike a certain UK east coast airfield who take that as cart blanche to clear IFR traffic for a visual approach without it being requested (I know - I had it done to me!)
The fact that it's up to the crew to request it, not ATC to offer it means I wouldn't worry whether ICAO have the phraseology for it or not. IFR inbounds get told the type of instrument approach to expect - if they want to go visual then they ask - they're all big enough, qualified enough and able enough to do so. (Bear in mind that with sequencing you might not actually be able to offer it anyway when requested).
If such phraseology exists then it's pointless bearing in mind the above.
The fact that it's up to the crew to request it, not ATC to offer it means I wouldn't worry whether ICAO have the phraseology for it or not. IFR inbounds get told the type of instrument approach to expect - if they want to go visual then they ask - they're all big enough, qualified enough and able enough to do so. (Bear in mind that with sequencing you might not actually be able to offer it anyway when requested).
If such phraseology exists then it's pointless bearing in mind the above.
Joined: Nov 2005
Aviation Qualifications: PPL
Posts: 12,456
Likes: 368
From: Wildest Surrey
A point I'm always trying to convince my LCEs about.
The problem at my airfield when you clear them for a visual is that many pilots take this as carte blanche to bust the anti noise profile on final approach by descending prematurely, even though our AIP entry tells 'em not to.
The problem at my airfield when you clear them for a visual is that many pilots take this as carte blanche to bust the anti noise profile on final approach by descending prematurely, even though our AIP entry tells 'em not to.
Joined: Feb 2006
Posts: 22
Likes: 0
From: South Midlands
Don't agree that ATC can't offer a visual. MATS Pt 1 certainly doesn't prohibit it. In the bit about visual approach it says "controllers shall excercise caution in initiating a visual approach when there is reason to believe that the flight crew concerned is unfamiliar with the aerodrome and its surrounding terrain". To me that means ATC initiating it otherwise it, would say something like ".......excercise caution when clearing an aircraft for a visual approach".
Thread Starter
Joined: Apr 2006
Posts: 119
Likes: 2
From: Somewhere
Yes I always use this as well, but after giving a pilot a few vectors I find that pilots don't want to ask anymore. If the traffic situation is suitable for a visual at that time, which would also cut down on RTF time due to no more vectors, how do I remind a pilot that he can go visual if he wants?
Maybe ICAO is starting to think along these lines.
Looks like there is no standard out there.
Thanks to all for your contributions. Keep them coming if anyone has any more!
Joined: Apr 2003
Posts: 59
Likes: 0
From: Near London, alledgedly..
I can think of another situation where I would possibly need to ask..
Say I have one inbound on the ILS on my frequency and a towed a/c to cross in front of the localiser. The best way at my aerodrome is go get them on a VIS so that any deflection in the ILS shouldnt affect their approach. I think neptune is basically asking if there is an official way of asking.
Say I have one inbound on the ILS on my frequency and a towed a/c to cross in front of the localiser. The best way at my aerodrome is go get them on a VIS so that any deflection in the ILS shouldnt affect their approach. I think neptune is basically asking if there is an official way of asking.
Joined: Mar 2002
Posts: 438
Likes: 0
From: Sunny Warwickshire
Bit of an awkward one this.
MATS pt 1 appendix E under the standard phraseology for instrument approaches to landing there is:
"cleared visual approach runway (designator)"
Under phraseology for radar approaches there is:
"vectoring for (aid) approach; runway (designation)"
My interpretation that visual reference to the surface is an "aid" and therefore we can advise pilots that they ware being vectored for a visual approach to the runway in use.
MATS pt 1 appendix E under the standard phraseology for instrument approaches to landing there is:
"cleared visual approach runway (designator)"
Under phraseology for radar approaches there is:
"vectoring for (aid) approach; runway (designation)"
My interpretation that visual reference to the surface is an "aid" and therefore we can advise pilots that they ware being vectored for a visual approach to the runway in use.
