Is a 'visual approach' considered an 'IFR approach' ?
Thread Starter
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Here and there... Mostly there !
Posts: 31
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Is a 'visual approach' considered an 'IFR approach' ?
Where do I find under JAR rules the text that describes whether a 'visual approach' at the end of an IFR flight is an IFR approach or not.
Thank you,
SD
Thank you,
SD
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Uh... Where was I?
Posts: 1,338
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It is IFR
An IFR flight has to be cancelled before it is considered VFR. the phraseology is "Cancel IFR at time xxx" if I recall correctly
A visual approach is not an IFR rules cancelation.
It is not in JAR, but in ICAO annexes, probably ICAO PANS ATM, maybe even in Annex 2 rules of the air.
An IFR flight has to be cancelled before it is considered VFR. the phraseology is "Cancel IFR at time xxx" if I recall correctly
A visual approach is not an IFR rules cancelation.
It is not in JAR, but in ICAO annexes, probably ICAO PANS ATM, maybe even in Annex 2 rules of the air.
PANS ATM Doc 4444 defines:
Visual approach. An approach by an IFR flight when either
part or all of an instrument approach procedure is not
completed and the approach is executed in visual reference
to terrain.
Visual approach. An approach by an IFR flight when either
part or all of an instrument approach procedure is not
completed and the approach is executed in visual reference
to terrain.
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Berkshire, UK
Age: 79
Posts: 8,268
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Years ago it used to be called a "Visual contact approach".
<<A visual approach is not an IFR rules cancelation.>>
Correct. In UK Class A airspace you cannot cancel IFR but Visual Approaches are possible.
<<A visual approach is not an IFR rules cancelation.>>
Correct. In UK Class A airspace you cannot cancel IFR but Visual Approaches are possible.
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 171
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Just to make things easier if you operate from here to there, in the US there still is a difference (subtle one) between a "Visual Approach" and a "[visual] Contact Approach"... IIRC one of the differences is that ATC may offer you one, but you have to ask for the other.
And for contact approach the only weather mins are "clear of cloud" and 1 SM visibility. Don't even have the the field in sight, all rather lower than a FAA visual mins. Few real contacts are flown at airline fields, but out the boonies, common.
GF
GF
Drain Bamaged
The Canadian version is explained here.
Contact & Visual Approaches - aviation.ca
You are supposed to have and keep your airport in sight went asking for a visual.
I recall someone who required a "visual" (when others were doing the approach or going "contact") at a relatively busy uncontrolled airport in dodgy weather.
He went around, asking for a clearance, just to find himself at the end of the IFR queue.
Contact & Visual Approaches - aviation.ca
You are supposed to have and keep your airport in sight went asking for a visual.
I recall someone who required a "visual" (when others were doing the approach or going "contact") at a relatively busy uncontrolled airport in dodgy weather.
He went around, asking for a clearance, just to find himself at the end of the IFR queue.
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Ankh Morpork, DW
Posts: 652
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
In the USA, a "contact" approach is considered VFR, but the controller will provide separation.
Ref FAA AIM 5-4-24, a contact is IFR, in addition to the weather above, the airport has to have an IAP, the pilot only has to have a reasonable expectation of continuing to the airport and the pilot must request the contact approach. Sorry for the thread drift
GF
GF
