IFR question regarding timed approaches from a hold
Thread Starter
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Glens o' Angus by way of LA
Age: 60
Posts: 1,975
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
IFR question regarding timed approaches from a hold
The following points in quotations is a list of conditions when making a timed approach from a hold, most make sense to me except the points regarding the missed approach conditions,
Anyone want to have a stab at explaining why they are in there?
Anyone want to have a stab at explaining why they are in there?
Timed approaches may be conducted when the following conditions are met:
1. A control tower is in operation at the airport where the approaches are conducted.
2. Direct communications are maintained between the pilot and the Center or approach controller until the pilot is instructed to contact
3. If more than one missed approach procedure is available, none require a course reversal.
4. If only one missed approach procedure is available, the following conditions are met:
a. Course reversal is not required; and,
b. Reported ceiling and visibility are equal to or greater than the highest prescribed circling minimums for the IAP.
5. When cleared for the approach, pilots should not execute a procedure turn.
1. A control tower is in operation at the airport where the approaches are conducted.
2. Direct communications are maintained between the pilot and the Center or approach controller until the pilot is instructed to contact
3. If more than one missed approach procedure is available, none require a course reversal.
4. If only one missed approach procedure is available, the following conditions are met:
a. Course reversal is not required; and,
b. Reported ceiling and visibility are equal to or greater than the highest prescribed circling minimums for the IAP.
5. When cleared for the approach, pilots should not execute a procedure turn.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Glens o' Angus by way of LA
Age: 60
Posts: 1,975
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Ok that makes sense but why would a "timed approach" make the possibility of a mid air more likely than a few airplanes landing at the same field at around the same time under "normal" approach procedures.
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: london
Posts: 246
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I'm still guessing, but AIUI, timed approaches are used to provide a crude form of separation when operating IFR in a non-radar environment and to sequence a/c for landing in what is likely to a rather busier traffic environment than we are used to in the UK.
Join Date: Jan 2014
Location: glendale
Posts: 819
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
HI
Sounds like you took that from the US FAA AIM.
IF the missed apch procedure took you away from the holding fix, that would provide separation. BUT if timed apchs are in use, someone is holding while you are shooting the approach and if you MISS the apch you better not be turning back to the holding fix.
Be glad that in over 40 years of flying I have NEVER had to do timed apchs all over the contiguous states.
Radar will provide most everything for you at most airports.
This doesn't mean you shouldn't know the above info. YOU do understand that timed approaches are not just timing from the FAF to the MAP?
Its you get an expect approach clearance time of blank and start your approach then and the next guy gets a time which would allow you to get to the ground or to the missed apch holding fix which is not the FAF
Sounds like you took that from the US FAA AIM.
IF the missed apch procedure took you away from the holding fix, that would provide separation. BUT if timed apchs are in use, someone is holding while you are shooting the approach and if you MISS the apch you better not be turning back to the holding fix.
Be glad that in over 40 years of flying I have NEVER had to do timed apchs all over the contiguous states.
Radar will provide most everything for you at most airports.
This doesn't mean you shouldn't know the above info. YOU do understand that timed approaches are not just timing from the FAF to the MAP?
Its you get an expect approach clearance time of blank and start your approach then and the next guy gets a time which would allow you to get to the ground or to the missed apch holding fix which is not the FAF
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Silicon Hills
Posts: 234
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
We did some timed approaches when I worked a U.S. non-radar approach control in the '80s. Don't believe there are any non-radar approach controls left, and I don't know a single radar controller who would try it if there were a radar outage of some sort. We also had to run them at the FAA Academy in training back in the '70s. You would need to assign different missed approaches to succeeding aircraft, so #2 doesn't catch #1 on the miss.
It's a lot of radio and brain work to do successfully. Non-radar at a radar facility, (because of an outage) is usually very limited now. (One in, one out) Backup radar systems preferred, even if not as accurate. See:
Products | Technical Services Laboratory
It's a lot of radio and brain work to do successfully. Non-radar at a radar facility, (because of an outage) is usually very limited now. (One in, one out) Backup radar systems preferred, even if not as accurate. See:
Products | Technical Services Laboratory
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Oxford
Posts: 2,042
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It really is a different world to the UK. Imagine no procedural approaches here... yet NATS has virtually 100% radar coverage of southern UK, which they don't have to share with independent airfields...
