Descend visually?

[mcstiofan]

Hello,

I've recently come across a number of recordings of an approach unit nearby instructing aircraft assigned a visual approach, to "descend visually".

I'm trying to find out how legal this is and whether it's something that happens elsewhere.

Thanks

[Spitoon]

What, you mean elsewhere than Earth?

Go on, give us a clue about where you are so we can at least think about the procedures that might be in use.

[Andy Mayes]

A number of recordings

YouTube by any chance?

As you refer to legalities, I'd recommend you not refer to anything you read on internet forums in a court of law.

Wherever the alleged phraseology was used, it may have have been subject to a rigorus risk assesment and approved for use by the relevant state authority (not that I'm saying its wrong or illegal).

[HEATHROW DIRECTOR]

Seems to me to be too much chat..... if the guy is cleared for a Visual Approach the descent will be visually!

[mcstiofan]

Haha, sorry, I was in a rush when writing this. I guess I ought to fix my location(It's something I randomly put in there when registering). This happened in the wonderful little place called Belgrade(LYBE).

I believe some are on Youtube, but I'll have to go through a number of videos to find them...so coming shortly.

@Andy Mayes: Thanks for the tip! I'm merely doing this to try and figure some things out, although I'm perfectly aware that there are ludicrous sidetracks that each place tends to make up. Hence, why the question

@HD, this was shortly before the clearance. The guy was given a heading and a "descend visually" instruction.



Before I can upload or find the links, the sequence was something like this:

1. Arrival info, some heading and altitude changes and all the usual initial stuff.

2. At some point, "Fly heading blah blah blah, to position on downwind[Or something to that extent], descend visually".

3. At some point later came the actual visual approach clearance.

[HEATHROW DIRECTOR]

Mmmmm... not quite the way us chaps do it!

[Blockla]

In Oz after a pilot of IFR reports visual we may for sequencing/traffic management descend them below the Lowest Safe Altitude, we would say something like "Descend to 3 thousand, Visual" i.e. don't run yourself into a tree/hill but keep going down to 3 thousand at your discretion/judgement... This may help us get a shorter downwind/closer intercept of final or the like, less track miles etc...

I would guess this is just a way of getting below the Radar Lowest Safe or Minimum Safe Altitude, before issuing the clearance for final, a way of 'expediting the traffic'.

[GunkyTom]

Have definately used this phrase, almost on a daily basis. If an a/c requests a visual app but you can't release him own nav at that time, then 'continue heading ... descend visually' or words to that effect are used by most at my unit. Then when whatever was restricting the app is sorted 'C/S cleared vis app rwy ...no descent restriction' The no restriction bit may not be necessary but confirms the new clearance and prevents the inevitable 'can we descend too ?'

[mcstiofan]

Have definately used this phrase, almost on a daily basis. If an a/c requests a visual app but you can't release him own nav at that time, then 'continue heading ... descend visually' or words to that effect are used by most at my unit. Then when whatever was restricting the app is sorted 'C/S cleared vis app rwy ...no descent restriction' The no restriction bit may not be necessary but confirms the new clearance and prevents the inevitable 'can we descend too ?'

Care to share where that is?



The reason that I wanted to see whether this was normal, is out of concerns for lost comms etc. If a guy is only given a "descend visually", without a specific altitude or alternate instructions, if he loses comms, then enters IMC or decides to abort/etc, there is little he can do to be sure as to what the controller expected him to do. Sure he can reference MSAs and in these days of GPS it's a lot easier to find one's way than it was, but still. With a specific altitude, at least he's guaranteed some clearance. Wouldn't yee experienced folk agree?

[zilir]

Hi everyone

We do not use the phrase "descend visually'' since it is considered not safe, but instead we use " descend in VMC alt xxxx (because you have of give a clearance limit) maintain own separation with terrain'' in this situation covers the legal aspect of the problem, so the separation from the terrain responsibility remains with the pilot. Of course one has first to make sure that the flight is in VMC

[Helen49]

Why do people always complicate simple things.......? If an aircraft meets the criteria for and the traffic situation permits a visual approach, then clear it for a visual approach. Simple!!
Helen

[2 sheds]

Quite so!

2 s

[GunkyTom]

Why do people always complicate simple things.......? If an aircraft meets the criteria for and the traffic situation permits a visual approach, then clear it for a visual approach. Simple!!
Helen

I agree but in my example, the a/c didn't fully meet the requirement however there is sometimes the possibility of giving an unrestricted descent or unrestricted headings. The a/c appreciate it or they wouldn't take advantage of it.

A lot depends on your location and it is easy to try and apply a procedure to your place of work and state it doesn't work with your traffic/airspace but not everywhere is the same.

Regarding comms failure and terrain clearance etc, I work on an island so there is no terrain apart from the airport to worry about. There is also the caveat that reasonable assurance exists that it can be completed. If I have any indication, such as reports from pilots or ATCOs that there may be an issue then the clearance isn't issued-simples

[criss]

Seen it regularly when visiting towers in Austria. It doesn't need to have anything to do with a visual approach, most of the time, a/c were vectored for instrument approach.

At airports with mountainous terrain around, you have a lot of minimum vectoring altitude sectors. If you have an a/c at FL120 and want to descend it to 4000, but have sectors of MVA of FL100, FL90, FL80, 060A each spanning just a few miles along its route, it can increase your workload. After establishing that a/c is visual with terrain, you issue a "descend visually to 4000ft".

I won't give you any reference to regulations as we dont have to use it at my unit.

[Duane]

once an aircraft has reported 'visual' (ie can navigate by land or water to the airfield) you can assign an altitude visual. This allows ATC to assign a level that may be below radar terrain chart, however responsibility for terrain clearance is put on the pilot.

visual levels are perfectly legal (at least they are in Australia) they are used to give aircraft the most descent they can possibly give and provide the best possible service (in flight conditions withstanding).

It should also be noted that you are required to report visual in order to be cleared on a visual approach. if you are given decent visual (and not a visual approach) it would be because the controller is unable to give away the visual approach (think traffic below you!)

[mcstiofan]

Thanks for all the replies. I guess it's just one of those slightly more weird and location/scenario-specific interpretations of the rules.

[Bern Oulli]

Hazarding an educated guess I would say that GunkyTom is in Jersey, Les Isles de la Manche.

Ex-donkey