Circling approach for the straight in runway
Guest
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: On the Beach
Posts: 3,336
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Another consideration at an airport such as Medford: Fly the ILS with a tailwind and circle-to-land to Runway 32.
Gets CAT D 1,260 feet lower and negates the need for a steep descent over high terrain: And, the ILS 14 has the new TERPs larger circling airspace, unlike the RNAV-D.
Gets CAT D 1,260 feet lower and negates the need for a steep descent over high terrain: And, the ILS 14 has the new TERPs larger circling airspace, unlike the RNAV-D.
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Zulu Time Zone
Posts: 730
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
When the author mentions "where you aren’t comfortable landing straight-in" I believe it probably refers to the vertical profile that might be too steep, don't think it has anything to do with marginal weather for a straight in approach, but that's just my opinion of course.
There are IAPs where you have to circle back if the wind favours what would otherwise be the straight-in runway, due to the approach profile being too steep. Aspen was mentioned, here is another one:
If you were not permitted to land on 02 from this approach there would simply be a note stating it was Not Authorised. But you are permitted to land on 02. This procedure has been approved. The manoeuvre is legal.
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: EASA land
Posts: 27
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Exactly. You can not proceed past the MAP if you are not visual with the runway.
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Having a margarita on the beach
Posts: 2,423
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The whole point of this thread is the legality of the manoeuvre itself. You either have the weather minimums or you don't, that is not in question.
There are IAPs where you have to circle back if the wind favours what would otherwise be the straight-in runway, due to the approach profile being too steep. Aspen was mentioned, here is another one:
If you were not permitted to land on 02 from this approach there would simply be a note stating it was Not Authorised. But you are permitted to land on 02. This procedure has been approved. The manoeuvre is legal.
There are IAPs where you have to circle back if the wind favours what would otherwise be the straight-in runway, due to the approach profile being too steep. Aspen was mentioned, here is another one:
If you were not permitted to land on 02 from this approach there would simply be a note stating it was Not Authorised. But you are permitted to land on 02. This procedure has been approved. The manoeuvre is legal.
Guest
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: On the Beach
Posts: 3,336
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
this is irrelevant with respect to the OP’s question. Again, the above procedure is not a straight in approach and has logically only circling minimum. You can’t fly a straight in approach (in terms of offset and grandient) for runway XX and then circle for that same runway, it does not make any sense.
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Third planet from the sun
Posts: 383
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
) (And ... I do believe that a competent, well prepared crew and familiar with LGIR can do it in a perfectly safe way if planned and briefed adequately! But... remember we're not discussing the wisdom of such a manoeuvre, but only the legality of it.)If it's not forbidden, it's not illegal!
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Having a margarita on the beach
Posts: 2,423
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
In my opinion, it DOES make sense! Look again at the VOR 27 app in LGIR. At straight in minima of 1100 ft a plane on a 3.3° descent path would still be more than 5000 m from the runway. Let's assume a visibility of 3500 m. In most companies the pilot would need to make a go around at that point if he intended to make a straight in landing, because he wouldn't be visual with the runway. At the circling minima of 1140 feet at 1.5 DME he would have the runway in sight. So, if a pilot planned to maintain 1140 ft to 1.5 DME and planned to fly a (right hand pattern over the sea) circling approach like in the drawing posted by oggers, there would be nothing illegal about that. (Unless you keep insisting that a temporary visual obstruction from the airframe itself, would oblige the pilote to execute a missed approach. ) (And ... I do believe that a competent, well prepared crew and familiar with LGIR can do it in a perfectly safe way if planned and briefed adequately! But... remember we're not discussing the wisdom of such a manoeuvre, but only the legality of it.)
If it's not forbidden, it's not illegal!
) (And ... I do believe that a competent, well prepared crew and familiar with LGIR can do it in a perfectly safe way if planned and briefed adequately! But... remember we're not discussing the wisdom of such a manoeuvre, but only the legality of it.)If it's not forbidden, it's not illegal!
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Having a margarita on the beach
Posts: 2,423
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
On a side note, I know we are only discussing "legal aspects" but guys nobody will shoot You for not being able to land out of a straight in approach in marginal weather and having to divert. On the opposite side, if somebody ends up trying to be smart by doing something he has never tried before or has never heard of, then things could go differently.
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Third planet from the sun
Posts: 383
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I give You credits for the explanation but to be honest I don't think anybody would get away with it should an event occur in such circumstances. I can't prove You black on white that it is not legal, but I would not want to discover it under a safety investigation conducted by some Authority, therefore, before some readers decide to try it out and avoid an unnecessary diversion to their operator, I would really try to bring it to the attention of some regulators and come up with a clear cut explanation.
Originally Posted by sonicbum
On the opposite side, if somebody ends up trying to be smart by doing something he has never tried before or has never heard of, then things could go differently.
But, we're not talking about the legality anymore and that was the main question.
My personal final conclusion: It's not illegal, therefore it's legal. whether it's a good idea depends on many other considerations that have nothing to do with the legal aspect! (But in Heraklion it sure is less risky than circling to 09) This was my last contribution to this thread. (Unless anybody would start making incredibly stupid remarks !
)
Last edited by sabenaboy; 1st Apr 2019 at 20:33.
On a straight in approach if the runway is insight and I am too high it is because something went wrong in my NPA, so it is a go around and we give it another try.
On a side note, I know we are only discussing "legal aspects" but guys nobody will shoot You for not being able to land out of a straight in approach in marginal weather and having to divert. On the opposite side, if somebody ends up trying to be smart by doing something he has never tried before or has never heard of, then things could go differently.
On a side note, I know we are only discussing "legal aspects" but guys nobody will shoot You for not being able to land out of a straight in approach in marginal weather and having to divert. On the opposite side, if somebody ends up trying to be smart by doing something he has never tried before or has never heard of, then things could go differently.
Two things I need to point out:
You keep saying straight in approach, but it is a circling approach, even if it is associated with a specific rwy (so no you wouldn't be too high if you are at circling minimum and close to the rwy.
This is not some crazy newn thingy, like I already posted, the guy representing 60.000 airline pilots in the USA says this is okay, and it is trained too, it's apparently in the Canadian AIM.
There's no way the pilot would get in trouble if he followed this procedure correct if something were to happen. Maybe if it would go wrong often enough the authorization would be removed, but guess what, many more aircraft have crashed dipping below minimum or
diving down get the straight in, than by circling back.
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: SAYE
Posts: 281
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
FWIW:
FAA H-8083-16B: Approaches whose final approach segment is more than 30 degrees different from the landing runway alignment are always designated as circling approaches.
.
EASA: A circling approach is the visual phase of an instrument approach to bring an aircraft into position for landing on a runway which is not suitably located for a straight-in approach. (JAR-OPS 1.435 (a) (1))
JEPPESEN: CIRCLING APPROACH / CIRCLE-TO-LAND MANEUVER — An extension of an instrument approach procedure which provides for visual circling of the aerodrome prior to landing.
FAA H-8083-16B: Approaches whose final approach segment is more than 30 degrees different from the landing runway alignment are always designated as circling approaches.
.
E.g.: When the landing is to be made on a runway that is not
aligned with the approach being flown, the controller may
issue a circling approach clearance, such as “…cleared
for VOR Runway 17 approach, circle to land Runway 23.”
aligned with the approach being flown, the controller may
issue a circling approach clearance, such as “…cleared
for VOR Runway 17 approach, circle to land Runway 23.”
EASA: A circling approach is the visual phase of an instrument approach to bring an aircraft into position for landing on a runway which is not suitably located for a straight-in approach. (JAR-OPS 1.435 (a) (1))
JEPPESEN: CIRCLING APPROACH / CIRCLE-TO-LAND MANEUVER — An extension of an instrument approach procedure which provides for visual circling of the aerodrome prior to landing.
I think we’re reading the definitions kind of backwards. OK, runways more than 30degs offset (15degs for GPS) from the instrument FAT are designated as circling approaches but that is to stop you going down to the (normally) more permissive PA/NPA minima for the IA runway and trying to manoeuvre at the last minute onto the landing one at too low an altitude. It’s not, IMO, to stop you doing a circling approach to a non-offset runway.
There is nothing that I can think of (visual references, charted notes and ATC excepted) that stops you circling onto *any* runway off *any* approach as long as you stay within the circling area and respect the circling minima. That is the whole point of the area in the first place, yes?
To sum up generically: you can use circling minima to make an approach from any direction to any runway but you can only use IA minima for a non-offset approach. Simples!
There is nothing that I can think of (visual references, charted notes and ATC excepted) that stops you circling onto *any* runway off *any* approach as long as you stay within the circling area and respect the circling minima. That is the whole point of the area in the first place, yes?
To sum up generically: you can use circling minima to make an approach from any direction to any runway but you can only use IA minima for a non-offset approach. Simples!
I think we’re reading the definitions kind of backwards. OK, runways more than 30degs offset (15degs for GPS) from the instrument FAT are designated as circling approaches but that is to stop you going down to the (normally) more permissive PA/NPA minima for the IA runway and trying to manoeuvre at the last minute onto the landing one at too low an altitude. It’s not, IMO, to stop you doing a circling approach to a non-offset runway.
There is nothing that I can think of (visual references, charted notes and ATC excepted) that stops you circling onto *any* runway off *any* approach as long as you stay within the circling area and respect the circling minima. That is the whole point of the area in the first place, yes?
To sum up generically: you can use circling minima to make an approach from any direction to any runway but you can only use IA minima for a non-offset approach. Simples!
There is nothing that I can think of (visual references, charted notes and ATC excepted) that stops you circling onto *any* runway off *any* approach as long as you stay within the circling area and respect the circling minima. That is the whole point of the area in the first place, yes?
To sum up generically: you can use circling minima to make an approach from any direction to any runway but you can only use IA minima for a non-offset approach. Simples!
Yup, couldn't agree more.
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Having a margarita on the beach
Posts: 2,423
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Gents the “pro-circling” explanations are definitely very well exposed and I am in no position to prove You wrong. I will try to dig for more information from official sources, as it is quite an interesting topic.
Cheers.
Cheers.
Guest
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: On the Beach
Posts: 3,336
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
FWIW:
FAA H-8083-16B: Approaches whose final approach segment is more than 30 degrees different from the landing runway alignment are always designated as circling approaches.
.
FAA H-8083-16B: Approaches whose final approach segment is more than 30 degrees different from the landing runway alignment are always designated as circling approaches.
.
E.g.: When the landing is to be made on a runway that is not
aligned with the approach being flown, the controller may
issue a circling approach clearance, such as “…cleared
for VOR Runway 17 approach, circle to land Runway 23.”
aligned with the approach being flown, the controller may
issue a circling approach clearance, such as “…cleared
for VOR Runway 17 approach, circle to land Runway 23.”
In the U.S., this would only be at an airport with an operating control tower. If there is not an operating control tower, center or approach control cannot dictate how you circle or what runway you are to use.
Join Date: Dec 2019
Location: nigeria
Posts: 2
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Loking through the APCH chart, the VOR DME 16 has a straight in minima of 800ft and circling minima of 1070ft.
First check your company Ops Spec to see if there is a special approval for certain approaches.
Having said that, i will advice the crew descend to 1070ft, if the have visual of the RWY, the request for Contact approach from ATC.
Make sure everything you do is within legality.
Chidiebere
First check your company Ops Spec to see if there is a special approval for certain approaches.
Having said that, i will advice the crew descend to 1070ft, if the have visual of the RWY, the request for Contact approach from ATC.
Make sure everything you do is within legality.
Chidiebere
