Circling approach for the straight in runway
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Having a margarita on the beach
Posts: 2,420
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
EU Ops Definitions:
Circling: 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.
The flight maneuvers should be conducted within the circling area, and in such a way that a visual contact with the runway, or the runway environment, is maintained at all times.
To me it is pretty clear Your example is not allowed.
Circling: 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.
The flight maneuvers should be conducted within the circling area, and in such a way that a visual contact with the runway, or the runway environment, is maintained at all times.
To me it is pretty clear Your example is not allowed.
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Zulu Time Zone
Posts: 730
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
EU Ops Definitions:
Circling: 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.
The flight maneuvers should be conducted within the circling area, and in such a way that a visual contact with the runway, or the runway environment, is maintained at all times.
To me it is pretty clear Your example is not allowed.
Circling: 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.
The flight maneuvers should be conducted within the circling area, and in such a way that a visual contact with the runway, or the runway environment, is maintained at all times.
To me it is pretty clear Your example is not allowed.
Circling to land straight-in Figure 4 [Fig 4 shows circling 180° to the D/W before landing on the stright-in runway as per the OP] is the method I recommend for handling a situation like the MFR IAP, where you aren’t comfortable landing straight-in. The first reaction of both pilots and controllers is to “do a 360 on final” rather than what I’ve illustrated. A 360 degree turn on final is fine on a clear VFR day. That’s not the type of day with which this article is concerned,however. I’m assuming night or day with precip, bumps, gusty winds,etc. When you really need to circle at MFR, Figure 4 is the way to do it. Fly down the runway at MDA until it’s about to disappear under the nose,then enter the close-in circle-to-land maneuver.
Wally Roberts is a retired airline captain, former chairman of the ALPA TERPs Committee, and an active CFII in San Clemente, CA
Wally Roberts is a retired airline captain, former chairman of the ALPA TERPs Committee, and an active CFII in San Clemente, CA
Only half a speed-brake
For a visual approach (approach procedure segment of IFR flight, to correct Iron Eagle above), OTOH it is perfectly legal. Navigate by visual means, understand the implications on (reduction of) ATC service provided and enjoy at own peril. VOR let-downs in CFU are a nice example.
The references for both have been already provided in the posts above, I guess.
Only half a speed-brake
He could be, against the EASA rules. Which BTW prescribe an immediate G/A upon reaching what the US calls DDA.
Though I would say, by your description of FIG 4, that the manoeuvre is NOT in disagreement. If you overfly the runway and bank for downwind, just by looking down you could be able to see the inside of the airport fence still.
---
Sorry to muddy the waters a bit more even: the does the "runway environment" in circle-to-land EASA frame, have a definition? I seem to remember it actually does, and "inside airport fence" I just wrote above does not suffice.
Though I would say, by your description of FIG 4, that the manoeuvre is NOT in disagreement. If you overfly the runway and bank for downwind, just by looking down you could be able to see the inside of the airport fence still.
---
Sorry to muddy the waters a bit more even: the does the "runway environment" in circle-to-land EASA frame, have a definition? I seem to remember it actually does, and "inside airport fence" I just wrote above does not suffice.
Last edited by FlightDetent; 28th Mar 2019 at 17:51.
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Third planet from the sun
Posts: 383
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Lantirn
Really? My minimums for this plate on circling are 2.4V. Lido provider. Strange.
Originally Posted by Lantirn
The question is:
Are you allowed to execute a circling approach for the straight in runway? More specifically, are you allowed to lose contact with the runway environment (due to aircraft movement-and not due to external weather conditions) when maneuvering for the downwind?
Some say yes, some say no. That’s the discussion.
Are you allowed to execute a circling approach for the straight in runway? More specifically, are you allowed to lose contact with the runway environment (due to aircraft movement-and not due to external weather conditions) when maneuvering for the downwind?
Some say yes, some say no. That’s the discussion.
Originally Posted by sonicbum
The flight maneuvers should be conducted within the circling area, and in such a way that a visual contact with the runway, or the runway environment, is maintained at all times.
To me it is pretty clear Your example is not allowed.
To me it is pretty clear Your example is not allowed.
I would think that it is ok to temporarily have the rwy sight obstructed by the airframe while joining downwind as long as you stay within the circling visual manoeuvring area. The rule was ment to indicate that it's not ok to loose sight of the rwy due to reducing visibility or entering clouds. Would you want a high wing aircraft to go around if the wing hides the runway temporarily when turning to base leg? Or a low winged aircraft that loses sight of the rwy when he banks away from the center line to join downwind for the opposite rwy? In your interpration that would oblige the pilot to abandon the circling!
Take a look at the LGIR VOR 27.
I think it would be perfectly LEGAL to maintain 1140 to IRA 1.5DME (Too high for straight in) continue overhead and then turn right to join downwind for rwy 27. I think that would be legal and not more dangerous then circle to land for rwy 09.
It’s an interesting question, which I had to re-read in order to see exactly what it was getting at.
In my airline, generically I’d have two options:
a) fly the NPA using a CDA to MDA then continue for a straight-in or GA,
b) fly the NPA to circling minima then “circle”, as long as I had achieved visual reference before the MAP.
You could make the argument that due to the weather, the runway was not suitable for a straight-in and as long as you had sight of the runway environment, which you should do as you’re over the airfield, then that satisfies the regulations, especially if you offset dead-side a little.
The actual conditions vs. minima makes a big difference as well. If you have visual conditions you can always “revert” to VFR and fly circuits but you’re constrained to the circling area if not.
Overall, I think there is enough to make a decent defence over the legality of such a manoeuvre but if it’s that marginal that you can’t see the airfield off the instrument approach, personally I’d go somewhere else...
In my airline, generically I’d have two options:
a) fly the NPA using a CDA to MDA then continue for a straight-in or GA,
b) fly the NPA to circling minima then “circle”, as long as I had achieved visual reference before the MAP.
You could make the argument that due to the weather, the runway was not suitable for a straight-in and as long as you had sight of the runway environment, which you should do as you’re over the airfield, then that satisfies the regulations, especially if you offset dead-side a little.
The actual conditions vs. minima makes a big difference as well. If you have visual conditions you can always “revert” to VFR and fly circuits but you’re constrained to the circling area if not.
Overall, I think there is enough to make a decent defence over the legality of such a manoeuvre but if it’s that marginal that you can’t see the airfield off the instrument approach, personally I’d go somewhere else...
Thread Starter
Join Date: May 2007
Location: FL390
Age: 38
Posts: 224
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Ok let’s assume it’s legal.
Its a very good reason to forget everything we know about legislation and eventually disregard all the minimums. Why?
Because everytime, we could just fly overhead and if we could “see the runway”, we could maneuver the airplane and land. It just doesn’t make sense to me.
Its a very good reason to forget everything we know about legislation and eventually disregard all the minimums. Why?
Because everytime, we could just fly overhead and if we could “see the runway”, we could maneuver the airplane and land. It just doesn’t make sense to me.
Because everytime, we could just fly overhead and if we could “see the runway”, we could maneuver the airplane and land. It just doesn’t make sense to me.
P.S. That’s effectively what you do with a “breakcloud” procedure.
P.P.S. I’m not saying it’s a good idea in all circumstances but that wasn’t the original question?
Only half a speed-brake
Lantirn, let's ask what is a circle-to-land. A manoeuvre executed at the MDA inside the protected area to bring an aeroplane to land. As long as we are talking what's legal, there is no mention to which runway or what type of trajectory is allowed. Thus as long as you maintain the runway or its (immediate) environment in sight, you're authorised (all other boxes assuming ticked, no matter how unlikely).
Admittedly some of the examples above are solved by a simple straight in landing anyway, so debating too deep is pointless.
Line-of sight obstructed by airframe parts does not sound as a show stopper. Leaving the airport behind in turn - I think that would be one.
Yet circle to lands are intended to get you to a non-straight-in runway in a low cloud overcast conditions. In good weather when the 3 deg CDFA is for some reason obstructed, ask for and declare a visual (still IFR proceudure) and get away from the runway in-sight restriction. Sorted.
Admittedly some of the examples above are solved by a simple straight in landing anyway, so debating too deep is pointless.
Line-of sight obstructed by airframe parts does not sound as a show stopper. Leaving the airport behind in turn - I think that would be one.
Yet circle to lands are intended to get you to a non-straight-in runway in a low cloud overcast conditions. In good weather when the 3 deg CDFA is for some reason obstructed, ask for and declare a visual (still IFR proceudure) and get away from the runway in-sight restriction. Sorted.
Last edited by FlightDetent; 28th Mar 2019 at 17:39.
Only half a speed-brake
Only half a speed-brake
Case study "inspired by real events". Cloud layer bottom approx. 1200 AFE, inside 6 miles top of cover around 1800'.
(the MDA shaded area is symbolic, should be a bit higher to intersect the profile by 6 NM.)
(the MDA shaded area is symbolic, should be a bit higher to intersect the profile by 6 NM.)
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Zulu Time Zone
Posts: 730
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Sorry to muddy the waters a bit more even: the does the "runway environment" in circle-to-land EASA frame, have a definition? I seem to remember it actually does, and "inside airport fence" I just wrote above does not suffice.
The runway environment includes features such as the runway threshold or approach lighting aids or other markings identifiable with the runway.
Circling approaches such as this tell me that the FAA at least think you can maintain the runway environment in sight whilst putting your tail to the runway.
Only half a speed-brake
Thanks for digging the runway environment. You may have a point with that plate, but tail-to-runway still allows sight of the threshold in case of a left/right break, does it not?
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Having a margarita on the beach
Posts: 2,420
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Because A) if the landing runway has an useable IAP You either fly it or fly a visual approach, not a circle to land and B) 99.9% of EASA Operators comply with CDFA approaches regulations, therefore You can't level off and wait for the Mapt whilst being levelled.
Yes and another point that renders the original scenario moot for operators under EU-OPS. But still not a general prohibition under ICAO.
99.9% of EASA Operators comply with CDFA approaches regulations, therefore You can't level off and wait for the Mapt whilst being levelled.
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Having a margarita on the beach
Posts: 2,420
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Ok, I'll try again. If You are flying a, let's say, VOR APP for runway 16 with circling 34, You will level off at the circling MDA and fly the circuit, we are all happy with that. What You can't do if You are flying a CDFA is level off somewhere above the VOR MDA, reach the MAPt and then dive down to land on runway 16 (aside from the fact that You will probably bust all kind of stabilisation gates). Having said that, You can't fly a VOR APP for runway 16 and then circle for... runway 16 ! There is no legal provision to back up such a decision. You can fly either the published IAP (VOR in our scenario) or fly a visual.
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: Maryland USA
Posts: 133
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If the IAP leaves you so high and close you need to fly a 360 around the airport to land, isn't it a poorly designed approach to say the least?
Practically I can do stuff like this all day long in a 172 that can turn circles over the airport property, but a 121 jet flight??? In the USA this would likely be against the airline's opspec anyway.
Practically I can do stuff like this all day long in a 172 that can turn circles over the airport property, but a 121 jet flight??? In the USA this would likely be against the airline's opspec anyway.
Join Date: Jan 2014
Location: N5109.2W10.5
Posts: 720
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If the IAP leaves you so high and close you need to fly a 360 around the airport to land, isn't it a poorly designed approach to say the least?
Last edited by Goldenrivett; 29th Mar 2019 at 09:10.