|
Missed approach off a visual approach
http://www.pprune.org/tech-log/38712...-approach.html
Whats your views as ATCO's? It would be helpful if you could stick which FIR you work in when you reply. |
at our airfield (UK) we say one of two things;
If we want you to join the visual circuit - "Go Around...." "Join Rwy xx, not above 1000 feet QNH" Though if the GA is anticipated before hand over to Twr, the Director will say "in the event of a missed approach, turn L/R into the visual circuit, not above 1000 feet QNH" "Execute Missed Approach Procedure" and send them back to Director who will pick them up for another radar vectored pattern. MM |
Mad Jock
I read the three pages of the other topic you refer to and in which you said : " I would fly the published missed approach procedure for the instrument approach which we were previously informed we were doing. "... From my french atco POV, even if you want to fly such that, thinking on your own safety, it's not the right answer, the visual approach is not an IAP and for that don't have a MAP...so after having been cleared for a visual approach and only for that, into a controlled airspace, if you have to go around during this visual approach you must wait for an other clearance to fly something else...or you must have ask the atco after been cleared for your visual how can you fly in case of G/A during this visual...or if you are runing that with a very pro atco like me ;););) , be grateful to hear my proposition of G/A, not MAP, if you fail your final... |
Mad Jock
At your home base, if another visual approach could be fitted in, it would be offered to you with a maximum altitude given if necessary. eg "Right hand circuit, not above 2000ft". Otherwise we would expect you to execute a standard missed approach to altitude 3000ft (or 2500ft if radio fail). I think that I have only seen it happen once at Aberdeen, when a Budgie pilot lost visual reference on right base for RW34. In that case he was given a climbing right turn heading 345 to alt 3000ft. |
Cheers for the input.
It seems there is a very broad base of opinion on what should be done. Or what even a visual approach is. As we can see from our french collegues POV. letMfly thats the way I understood they way the world worked. But it seems to be a Scottish FIR SOP. Thats the reason why I started this thread to see how much variation there is in practise. I have been looking at national differences filed with IACO and this subject doesn't come up very often. And certainly not with the very broad differences which are being quoted in the other thread. |
It seems there is a very broad base of opinion on what should be done. |
The Canadian way
Hi Mad Jock,
In Canada, a visual approach does not have a missed approach portion and the pilot is expected to continue VFR and obtain another IFR clearance before entering cloud again, whether laterally or vertically. At a controlled airport, the tower controller will usually provide some guidance in the event of a missed approach so there should be no concern there. At an uncontrolled airfield, however, the pilot is supposed to somehow make contact with ATC again and request an IFR altitude before going into IMC. So if a pilot overshoots at un uncontrolled airport for anything other than weather, I expect him to fly a standard VFR circuit. If it's weather related then we'll have to figure it out when he calls. That's the way we apply it on this side of the North Atlantic. Cheers, Felix |
Mad Jock,
I really know what a visual approach is...be sure...and above all as I said I really know that's not an IAP and there's no MAP when you decide to proceed visual...that's the rule...in France, it seems to be the same in Canada and in all other ICAO region...what you decide to do in case of G/A during your visual with no more instruction from ATC is up to you...I maintain, you must fly under clearance, if into CAS, clearance done by ATC or received on your request after having been cleared visual... This problem of G/A during visual is a worldwide ATC and PILOTS problem since the visual approach began...try other forum and sure you will see same threads...with same questions...same answers... A bientôt on freq.... |
So do you peeps think a visual approach is a VFR procedure in you locality?
|
No, a visual approach is not a VFR procedure in my locality, neither elsewhere...but it's not really an IFR procedure...the flight is still managed under IFR rules...but don't follow the entire IFR procedure till the MAPt...where the published missed approach is due to begin...the end of the visual approach is not the MAPt, it's the runway...and there is no published missed approach for a visual approach...that's the rule, methinks...
I say again, what you decide to do going around on your own, during a visual, is up to you...and even if all pilots around the world are thinking like you...there is no MAP included in the visual approach leg...so or you do what you want, or what the ATCO said or what you asked to do before going around, there is no published action in case of going around during a visual approach in France, neither in UK, methinks... I knew that Canada specified something in their ATM rules, as said by " Say Again, Over ", and I think, it's the only country to do so, to my knowledge... So happy visuals, MJ... ;););) |
ICAO - According to ICAO, an air traffic controller may not assign a visual approach to an IFR flight, unless the pilot requests such an approach. Separation services (sometimes reduced) from preceding traffic will still be provided by ATC, and it remains the controller's responsibility to keep the aircraft in controlled airspace. Minima requirements: To request a visual approach in airspace with ICAO rules: i. The field is in sight and expected to remain in sight for the rest of the approach (pilot's discretion). ii. If the field is not in sight: the reported ceiling must be above the initial approach altitude and there must be enough visibility to see the runway at that distance. Missed Approach: A visual approach in ICAO has no missed approach segment. It is simply not defined. However, some European airlines suggest that their pilots do the following missed approach procedure from a visual approach: In ICAO operations the missed approach from a visual approach is to join the traffic pattern on a left downwind at 1500 feet AGL (jets and turboprops) or at 1000 feet AGL (piston), not the instrument (missed) approach procedure you were perhaps planning. Seems I am going to have to have a word with a couple of TRE's that apon accepting a missed approach the missed approach is to be requested as it is not even defined. Thanks for everyones input. |
Please MJ,
In which ICAO Doc. did you find this info ??? Tech Log updated too... |
This subject was discussed at last years IFATCA conference in committee B. There was a paper presented which resulted in the topic being kicked to the TOC (working group) for further examination.
The purpose of further examination was to then present another paper at next years conference with a view to liaising with ICAO about 'standardising' or making recommendations about what to do in this circumstance. There were issues with being visual for the approach portion, but possibly not visual during a missed approach or shortly afterwards, joining circuits, following an IMAP (which one?), radio failure etc. Various scenarios were presented which worked for a particular airport and airspace design but certainly would not work in other environments. Additionally there probably would be different procedures developed for VFR airports (with occasional IFR ops) vs IFR airports (with occasional VFR ops). Unfortunately following a single IFR MAP, depending on which one you were given (or is nominated), is only half the story; there are many airports where you get a star with a visual termination, thus never issued with an IFR approach expectation etc. Confusion also abounds about which IFR MAP to choose (if to follow one of those), GLS/MLS/RNAV/RNP/ILS/VOR/DME etc??? Should be some interesting discussions next year... Ultimately there should be a VSA MAP developed for each arrival runway to cater for the MAP/Go Round/comm failure etc. These probably need to be structured very similar to instrument MAPs to cater for all the scenarios where Visual conditions may not be maintained during the MAP; ie re establishing above minimum terrain altitudes etc. I also believe there were a couple of recommendations out of this years paper, but don't have them to hand right now. |
It is an old doc for faa v IACO differences which I presume is ICAO annex 2
Found it again http://www.vkzmp.com/downloads/faavsicao.pdf Trying to find something in EU-ops but that seems to be a restricted document as well. I have always been taught to follow the missed approach. I actually find it quite bizarre that nothing is dictated, it must be the only bit of an IFR flight that doesn't have some sort of rule or reg pertaining to its conduct. Edited to add it seems the previous poster has answered my question mind you Ireland has the way forward in the grand scale of missed approaches. I think straight ahead to 2k everywhere apart from Dublin. Always a pleasure working with Irish ATCO's where ever they are in the world. |
Originally Posted by Blokla
Should be some interesting discussions next year...
|
What saintex are all international airports/area control in France going to only use English in 2010? :p
Only teasing mate ;) |
English...sure.... Scotish...never... ;););)
Or just to ask for an 18 years old Islay Lag..... :ok::ok::ok: |
Your talking my English mate
"Breast control whats your request" in a sexy french accent. Can't beat it. |
Missed Approach after a Visual Approach
What have ATCers have to say about this thread :
What altitude will you fly after a missed visual approach? (http://images.ibsrv.net/ibsrv/res/sr.../multipage.gif 1 2 3) Would definitely appreciate a definitive answer from tower controllers! |
It depends on what sort of airfield you mean. At a small airfield with light traffic it may just mean a turn back into the visual circuit. At a large airport ATC will issue appropriate instructions to sequence the aircraft for a further approach.
|
| All times are GMT. The time now is 18:27. |
Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.