When is an approach complete?
 

I would like to survey pilots' opinions as to when a Cat I/II/III approach is complete. Is it at decision height? Is it after the aircraft has landed? Is it as the aircraft exits the runway onto the taxiway system. When is it?

Many thanks.

RE

When the chocks are in place. The hardest part of Cat III conditions is taxiing.

Int has it.

An approach is complete when the park brake is set.

I don't really agree with both of those replies, however I think I understand where Fantom and Intruder are coming from.

An approach to landing is just that. The approach finishes when touchdown occurs whatever the weather conditions.

During Cat3b conditions rollout guidance is given until the runway turnoff - so one could argue that you have full autoland protection up and until that point.

I agree with the sentiment of the replies in that the very difficult part is then taxiing to the stand.


Regards
Exeng

The approach ends when the crew selects reverse or selects TOGA. After that the aircraft has either landed or is going-around. But there are only two outcomes to an approach: landing or going around! (not counting crashing ok...)

With regard to cat 3b: landing rollout... Not approach rollout!

Lets not start confusing words here just to sound like smart-a****. For taxying there is a separate word... Taxying! Then there is also parking...

Is this a serious question??? Nobody thinks the work is done after the approach do they? Threats are different in every situation, so don't suddenly treat a cat3b approach the same as low-vis taxying.

Guess it depends who you talk to. When I did my original IR test around 12 years ago the examiner (UK CAA) was very clear in stating that under the regulations in the UK the 'approaches' were complete at the DA / MDA, if you went around then that was the Go Around Phase, if you continued to land then that forms part of the landing assessment i.e. you can fly a perfect ILS to the DA and then cock up the landing, that would be judged as a pass grade for the ILS but a resit for the landing assesment.

So in answer to the above I would consider that the approach starts at the IAF and finishes at the applicable minima, in the case of a CAT III that would be at wheel touchdown when NO DA.

Folks,
There are the practicalities and the legalities.
The UK Examiner is right, but only in terms of the phases of the approach and missed approach. -- effectively the various PANS/OPS segments.
When you are "cleared for approach", the clearance limit is the runway threshold, that is where the approach ends and the landing starts. Sorry I can't give you a reference, time-wise, it is too close to Christmas.
Tootle pip!!

The approach usually ends with a phone number or a rejection … occasionally you make it to the landing strip :E

Thinking from an examiner standpoint.

There are two phases here: approach and landing.

So where does the approach end and the landing phase begin? For a NPA, the approach ends the moment you leave the MDA for the field, or once you reach the MAP - which is where the missed approach segment starts. For a precision approach or APV, the approach ends once you reach DA(H) - the landing starts if you're visual at that point or the missed approach segment starts at DA(H) with no contact.

I would consider consulting the accident/incident report forms. On these it asks you to state the phase of flight. You'll note approach, landing, G/A, taxying and others. I'd agree that the approach phase ends when you descend below the applicable minima. There you enter the landing phase. if you decide not to go below you've entered the G/A phase. After vacating the rwy you've entered the taxying phase.

I think that, in purely technical terms an 'approach', in CAT 1 or better, could be considered to be complete either 1) at the transition to visual reference or 2) at the point of go-round. However, during low vis ops, any approach is part of 'the system' that involves traffic spacing on approach and protection of the ILS signal environment around the runway. I would therefore suggest that under low vis ops your approach is not complete until you either carry out a go round, or until you have cleared the signal protection area around the runway after landing.

Folks,
Perhaps I didn't make myself sufficiently clear in an earlier post, to here goes again:

Are you referring to the segments of an approach, as per ICAO Doc 8168, or what ATC means by an approach.

Even with doc. 8168 procedures, if you have the required visual segment at minima, whether DA or MDA (not applicable for some Cat 111) the continued descent to the runway is still part of the approach, it is the visual segment of the instrument approach procedure. This just a strue for a straight in as a visual circling as a segment of an instrument approach.

As far as ATC is concerned, "cleared for approach" means your clearance limit is the threshold, until you get a landing clearance.

An instrument approach is only terminated at the DA/MDA if you commence a missed approach.

Thus, it seems to me that the ATC "definition" of approach, and an approach as an an instrument procedure, including the visual segment of the instrument procedure, are entirely consistent.

Tootle pip!!

I agree that it's the visual segment of the approach, but the visual segment could also start well before the DA or MDA, once the aircraft has visual reference to some part of the runway environment. At some point there needs to be a landing phase!

I don't think so. When you're cleared for an approach, your clearance limit is the missed approach holding point. Obviously if you receive landing clearance, you're allowed to land if you have the runway visual - obeying all the rules associated.

I don't think so. The instrument approach procedure is terminated at the missed approach holding point, which is the clearance limit. The missed approach point is where you transition from the final approach segment to the missed approach segment - both part of the instrument approach procedure.

Believe it or not ICAO actually has a document for that! It's called "phase of flight definitions"

This document describes the final approach sub-phase (as part of the IFR approach phase) as ending when the flare begins. Alternatively the missed approach phase may be commenced at any time during the approach. The approach phase begins at the IAF.

Various other entities may have other definitions geared to how they are used. Most of them would seem to be applicable to statistical or accident reporting.

Here's another one:

Airplane Flight Manuals include landing distance tables which describe the landing distance as being from a point 50' above the runway threshold until reaching a complete stop.

I'm sure there must be more...

westhawk

westhawk,
Thanks for that, and consistent with what I posted.

Italia 458,
Wherever you fly, your home CAA or whatever, have a look up your AIP, it will probably be there, it is also in Annex 10, Vol.2 somewhere: The phrase "cleared for approach" means the clearance limit is the threshold. Not any other point in space. Look it up to satisfy yourself. This sort of thing is basic, it is not a matter of opinion. You might also find it in UK CAA CAP 413.

The missed approach is certainly part of the "instrument procedure", but it is not part of the "approach". To go a little further back, phases of "approach", the "initial approach", the "intermediate approach", and the (final) approach, from the FAF/FAP, and terminating at the threshold/in the flare. The "missed approach" begins anywhere down the approach that the approach is discontinued, as Westhawk has noted. The design missed approach segment begins at the DH or MDA for the particular approach.

If you think your clearance limit when "cleared for approach" is the missed approach hold (if there is one) try a missed approach somewhere busy, and you will get a practical demonstration otherwise. For planning purposes, most CNS/ATM systems assume an approach will result in a landing, there is simply not enough airspace, at busy airports, to assume every approach will be a missed approach.

Particularly if the same runway is being used for arrivals and departures.

As to "visual segment" of an instrument approach, this is not the same thing as when you become visual somewhere on an actual approach, "visual segment" is part of the procedure design, and is fixed for a particular approach.

Tootle pip!!

Why do you ask, if you gave your question some context it might be easier to answer?

LeadSled:

Because there isn't any such reference.:)

A clearance for an instrument approach procedures has as it clearance limit the end point of the missed approach procedure.

Aircraft are usually flying throughout rollout until a variable airspeed. I would say it is when the aircraft has come to a full stop or exited the taxi way. You can always get a tow to the gate.

Looking at the OP's question in full context, I stand by my original answer. Rollout guidance and SMGCS are unique to Cat II/III operations. While you might be pendantic and debate the definition of "approach" in FAA, PansOps, EU-Ops, or other documents, getting safely to the gate is a MAJOR consideration in Cat III operations.

And how about getting FROM the gate TO the runway during low visibility conditions? I'd say it's just as much of a challenge. If an operator is approved for 600 RVR departures, it's pretty likely that they'll encounter visibilities of LESS than that during the TAXI phase. Or is that part of the takeoff? :cool:

But I agree in spirit with what you're implying intruder. In fact low RVR isn't necessary to present effectively poor visibility types of challenges to taxiing safely to or from your parking position. Especially at night. Or while it's raining/snowing. The way some of the lighting on the airport can glare off of wet/snowy/icy surfaces and windshields might make you want to whip out the low vis taxi chart and request a new taxi route!

In any event the specific criteria defining different phases of flight vary somewhat according to who defines them and for what purpose. Accident statistical analysis, certain aviation regulations and operator SOPs all differentiate between classification of events or requirements according to "phase of flight". A separate taxonomy for each purpose and usage it seems. In flying as in normal life, I find the inconsistencies in the use of terminology to be the single biggest source of misunderstanding among my peers. As such, this little discussion certainly does no harm even though it can easily be seen as having devolved into esoteric pedantry. :)

westhawk

There is certainly merit in calling the landing roll-out of a CAT III approach part of the approach. Having said that CAT III approaches are unique in their requirements for aided roll-out guidance.

Once down to taxi speed, though, the approach is over. Granted, getting to the gate can be very difficult;nonetheless that is not part of the approach procedure.

Although not advised, the airplane could stop on the runway and sit there for a very long time, or a few hundred feet off the runway on the taxiway. So, when would that be considered parked?

any approach is complete when ATC cancels your IFRclearance...its that simple

seven:

That is more of a controller's perspective.:):)

westhawk:

what forums are about!!

I can tell ya when it's complete, when ATC says so, that's when.

Proof:

Late night (1am), new pilot making first night landing with crosswinds, cleared ILS approach, in weather, at a field with a closed tower, so I didn't think about the coming complication. Break out below radio coversge, vacate the runway, do the "after landing", thank the pax, help get new plane put "to bed" with ground crew who are unfamiliar with new plane--lots of "stuff" happening. Wait, you know what's next....."Sir, the Fire Department called, ATC wants your flight plan closed."

So, the approach is over when ATC says so.

GF

C'mon GF, tell the truth! You received that call at the hotel bar didn't you?

West hawk

I can truthfully say, the call was from the FD, I did ring the local TRACON and I did so sheepishly.

Howver, the department chief, the next day said, he was glad they didn't call him which they had done in the past.

GF

Ya gotta admit my version makes a better story though. :ok:

Anyway it's based in truth but for one exception. (you'll figure it out by the end of the story)

I was on temporary work assignment in Springfield, IL and decided to check out in and rent a Cessna from an FBO at Capitol airport so I could fly to Dayton on the weekend for a visit to the AF museum. So a coworker and I flew over there in a 172 and had a great day, staying at the museum until past closing. After having some dinner and driving a rental car around Dayton for awhile, the weather started closing in so we got right outta there and headed back to SPI, arriving after the tower had closed for the night. Being the conscientious instrument rated private pilot I was, I had filed IFR but completely spaced on the fact that I'd need to close my flight plan myself since the tower was closed. It was while having drinks back at the hotel bar that my companion for the day asked how ATC knew we'd arrived safely at SPI. :uhoh: Needless to say my mea culpa call to FSS was embarrassing and it was a contrite me who went back into the bar to finish my drink! Turns out they'd already called airport security, who'd verified the airplane was safely parked in it's tie-down. :D

So I guess that particular flight ended at the bar.

westhawk

whether you like it or not, when the tower sees you down on the runway and unlikely to takeoff ATC cancels your clearance and the approach is over.

so...when you go to a non tower air port. you have to tell ATC that you are not a threat to other planes (ie you are on the ground in one piece).

good luck

When's the approach really over? When you get slapped, she walks away, or you get her key. Up until then keep working it. :O

Only 2 replies made me smile.:E:ok:

As to the question my answer is: Who cares really??????:{

LeadSled...

You're going to have to show me a reference for that. If you're cleared for an approach, the clearance limit is the missed approach holding waypoint. If a controller thinks that you will likely go missed due to weather they will usually amend the missed approach clearance by giving you a new missed approach clearance with a clearance limit. This is an example directly from Nav Canada ATC MANOPS:

Quote:

---

ON MISSED APPROACH CLEARED TO THE NORTH

---

Quote:

---

BAY VOR VIA VICTOR THREE SEVEN CLIMB TO ONE

SEVEN THOUSAND. UPON LEAVING THREE

THOUSAND TURN LEFT DIRECT MUSKOKA NDB,

PROCEED ON COURSE.

---

The clearance limit in that clearance is the North Bay VOR.

Quote:

---

The "missed approach" begins anywhere down the approach that the approach is discontinued, as Westhawk has noted. The design missed approach segment begins at the DH or MDA for the particular approach.

---

I do know the different segments of the instrument approach procedure. And I agree that a "missed approach" starts anytime you start it! But the missed approach segment, as you mention, is fixed.

CAR 602.127(1) states: "Unless otherwise authorized by the appropriate air traffic control unit, the pilot-in-command of an IFR aircraft shall, when conducting an approach to an aerodrome or a runway, ensure that the approach is made in accordance with the instrument approach procedure."

If ATC doesn't amend your approach clearance, you must make the approach in accordance with the instrument approach procedure. Is the missed approach segment part of the "instrument approach procedure"? Yes, it is. You must therefore follow it, unless you have an amendment to that ATC approach clearance.

Quote:

---

If you think your clearance limit when "cleared for approach" is the missed approach hold (if there is one) try a missed approach somewhere busy, and you will get a practical demonstration otherwise.

---

Wow! Show me a regulation that says that I can't do a missed approach when it's 'busy'. I don't give a damn if it's busy or not! And ATC doesn't either. They're required to protect the airspace (if in controlled airspace) from all IFR, and sometimes VFR, traffic when you're operating on an IFR clearance.

Can you show me an approach that doesn't have a missed approach holding point?

You should call up your local IFR area control center and ask them what the clearance limit is when you receive an approach clearance - trust me, they know!

'Approach to land'
Means is the approach and Land is the goal.:E
Fly the approach ,if Land ok,approach is over.
If Go around,a new approach clearance will be given.(once GA is started,approach is over).
If landing at an uncontrolled airport,flight plan is closed when reported to ATCO once on ground.(movile phones not allowed until engine(s) shut off:8).

1.10.6 Instrument Approach

1.10.6.1 Unless authorized to make a visual approach, an IFR flight must conform to the published instrument approach procedure nominated by ATC.

1.10.6.2 A pilot request to conduct a specific approach should be made prior to STAR clearance issue, or prior to top of descent for arriving aircraft not on a STAR eligible route.

1.10.6.3 Authorization for final approach will be in the form of a clearance for the type of approach as shown on the approach chart title. If visual at the minima, the nominated runway then becomes the clearance limit subject to any further ATC instructions and a clearance to land. In the event that the aircraft is unable to land from the instrument approach or loses visual reference while circling, the aircraft is cleared to carry out the published missed approach unless ATC directs otherwise. The pilot in command must seek further ATC instructions prior to reaching the end of the missed approach procedure. :ok:

As quoted by 9.G: (you should include the reference data for that)

That's pretty clear, IMO. And what happens when you don't get further ATC instructions prior to reaching the end of the missed approach procedure? - you hold! Either as published on the racetrack depicted on the plate, inbound on the published track, or inbound on the track on which you arrived at the missed approach holding point. - TC AIM RAC section.

g.f.:

Wrong on two accounts:

1. The issue was failure to close (yes, close, not cancel) an IFR flight plan at an uncontrolled airport. ATC has to hold open the airspace in those circumstances. That makes them very unhappy after some time has passed.

2. ATC doesn't "say so" in these circumstances but they are working from the same book as the pilot, which places the burden on the pilot to close his IFR flight plan once landed at an uncontrolled airport. At a controlled airport the tower closes it for you.

In the air the pilot can elect to cancel IFR, weather permitting, which then closes the IFR flight plan. But, you can't cancel IFR once on the ground, only close the flight plan.

Most FAA IAPs have a charted missed approach holding pattern unlike many countries.

Then again, at major airports ATC will more often than not provide radar vectors when the pilot declares a missed approach.

aterpster

Confession being good for the soul, my post was partly "tongue in cheek" and partly an effort to burnish my karma! Yes, I agree with both your points. The funny part is the day before at a nearby uncontrolled field, I did exactly as you stated. It was the combination of lots happenin' and forgetting that the tower had closed leading to failure to close the flight plan.

AA routinely closed the flight plan by cancelling IFR on approach when visual to that Puerto Rican airport on the west side that was a B52 base made it easier than contacting ATC after landing with a closed tower. It simplified things but may not have been 100% proper.

aterpster,
Sorry, old chap, it's in Annex 10, Vol.2, and repeated in the Australian AIP.

Italia 458,
I don't need to, see above --- as far as the meaning of "cleared for approach", and the stated clearance limit.

For those of you who seem to believe all missed approach segments end in a holding pattern, I suggest you have a thumb through an international Jepp., you might be surprised. That they normally do in US, for example, does not mean the rest of the world, or the procedure design options, require same.

Places that are a good example of the scramble for ATC when an aircraft does not land off an approach, regardless of the regulatory theory ---- and all from personal experience:
KJFK --- goes double when Canarsie approach is in use, KLAX, KSFO, EGLL, EGKK, EGCC, EDDF, EHAM and any major airport in Australia.

The nearest I have ever come to a mid-air was during a missed approach, 28L at EGLL, with another aircraft taking off on the same runway, fortunately a very slick ATC sorted, but a hard left turn a 500' on a missed approach wakes you up!!

Tootle pip!!