"Going for the Visual"

(Snowbird) wrote in
om:

The latter (vis approach clearance without me first calling the
airport in sight), but not the former. At the MIA, both radar
and radio reception will be tenuous -- and at an airport with no
IAP there's no requirement to assure radio reception at a given
altitude as there is with, for example, a MAHP. Operationally,
there are several apparent reasons why it's probably helpful to
go ahead and issue the clearance.

I have to agree that center is incorrect in giving a clearance for a visual
when you don't have the airport in sight. A cruise clearance would be more
appropriate. OTOH, once you receive the clearance, it's not your
responsibility to worry about the legality of ATC issuing it. The only
problem can be that you can't find the airport, or not see the airport when
you get to it. Then you have to get a clearance for an approach, and
center will have to come up with something. You can always request a
cruise clearance. Center may or may not issue it, but it's perfectly OK to
ask for one at any time.

--
Regards,

Stan

Snowbird wrote:

We're not following another aircraft.

Then you decline the visual.



Here in Billings we give a lot of visual approach clearances
on initial contact because the pilot calls the airport in sight 40 miles
out.


(wolf whistle) Nice.

Here in the midwest, we get a lot of summer wx where there's not a
cloud in the sky and the vis is nominally VFR -- at least you can
make out airports which are 3 miles away by GPS. But it's really
flight by reference to instruments. The forward vis is nil.
And once one starts a descent, the radius shrinks. Practically
speaking, I'm not going to see the airport until I'm practically
flying over it, yet there's no question whatsoever about my
ability to land there under VFR.

That's why we no longer live in the midwest. Every day that it's not
snowing the vis is over 100 miles.



Are you saying that the center, for no apparent reason, is just
giving you a visual approach clearance without you first calling the
airport in sight?


The latter (vis approach clearance without me first calling the
airport in sight), but not the former. At the MIA, both radar
and radio reception will be tenuous -- and at an airport with no
IAP there's no requirement to assure radio reception at a given
altitude as there is with, for example, a MAHP. Operationally,
there are several apparent reasons why it's probably helpful to
go ahead and issue the clearance.

Operationally it's not legal to give a clearance in that situation. You
should decline the clearance.

Roy Smith wrote:


As somebody who flies mostly in the New York area, I've never gotten a
cruise clearance in my life,

And you won't in that airspace.


so I'm not really up on the details. What
happens if I get "Cleared to the White Plains airport, via direct,
cruise 3000, frequency change approved, have a nice night"? For the
moment, let's assume it's 2:00 AM and the tower is closed.

You go to White Plains, staying between the MEA and 3000 until you see
the airport or get to a fix on an approach, shoot the approach and
cancel like at any nontowered airport.



I need 1000 and 3 to fly a visual. 30 miles out, I tune in the ATIS and
hear that the weather is 2500 & 10. I'm currently in IMC. When do I
begin my descent out of 3000 for the visual? I'm guessing I can't and
must shoot an instrument approach?

Yes.



OK, I decided to shoot the GPS-34
(http://www.myairplane.com/databases/.../HPN_agr34.pdf).
At what point do I stop going direct HPN and start heading to TUGME (the
IAF)?

Whenever you want.


And when do I begin my descent out of 3000?

When you are established on the approach as per the plate.



So, I start on down from TUGME, and quickly break out right at 2500 and
see the airport. Can I then change my mind about flying the GPS-34 and
switch to the visual?

Yes.


I'm guessing I can, so I make a right turn,
heading 000, to get lined up for a straight-in to 29 (my preferred
runway since it puts me closest to my parking spot).

Halfway to the airport, I discover I made a poor choice in breaking off
the GPS approach because suddenly I find myself in a rain shower and
quickly after that, back in IMC at 2000. I'm not worried about terrain
in the immediate vicinity because I know I'm above anything close, but I
figure a climb back to the MSA makes sense anyway, so I do that. Now
what?

Pick another approach and do it.


If I decide to climb to 3000 and head back to TUGME for another
GPS approach, am I still operating within my cruise clearance?

Yes.



I guess the gist of my question is, does the cruise clearance let me fly
a single approach, or does it let me stooge around in the vicinity of
the airport trying multiple approaches until I get in or give up?

You can do whatever you want until you land or give up.

Roy Smith wrote
What
happens if I get "Cleared to the White Plains airport, via direct,
cruise 3000, frequency change approved, have a nice night"? For the
moment, let's assume it's 2:00 AM and the tower is closed.

Well, I doubt you would ever get that at HPN (even at night, the area
is pretty busy) but something like that has been known to happen at
Huntsville (UTS) where 2200 is a perfectly valid IFR altitude but
RADAR coverage below about 4000 just won't happen. I like to take
students there (assuming their airplanes are fast enough to make the
trip worthwhile) when we have a stratus layer, just so they can get
that "You are on your own" feeling, and understand what it's like to
do the full approach (and maybe the full missed approach) without
being able to talk to anyone.

Anyway, my point is that I know what it's like to be cut loose 30
miles from the airport, even if I never have heard the magic word
(cruise) because out here it is done. If you pull up the VOR-DME A
approach for UTS (http://www.myairplane.com/databases/.../UTS_vd_gA.pdf)
you will note that it has 3 IAF's. Out there, you don't normally get
a clearance to one of them - you get a clearance for the approach.
Right away that should trip an alarm - the exact route is undefined!
What this means in practice is this - the controller doesn't care.
He's perfectly happy to block out a huge chunk of airspace for you,
because nobody else wants it.

I need 1000 and 3 to fly a visual. 30 miles out, I tune in the ATIS and
hear that the weather is 2500 & 10. I'm currently in IMC. When do I
begin my descent out of 3000 for the visual? I'm guessing I can't and
must shoot an instrument approach?

Why not? Your clearance is good for any altitude between 3000 and the
minimum applicable IFR altitude. As long as you can assure that you
will comply with 91.177, you may descend at your discretion. If
you're on a random route, all you need is 1000 ft above obstacles
within 4 nm (since the terrain is not mountainous). If you're on an
airway, HPN is well within 22nm of CMK, and the MOCA's are all lower
than 3000. That's the whole point of a cruise clearance - you own
everything from 3000 on down.

OK, I decided to shoot the GPS-34
(http://www.myairplane.com/databases/.../HPN_agr34.pdf).
At what point do I stop going direct HPN and start heading to TUGME (the
IAF)?

At any point. You are the only guy around. Nobody else is using the
airspace, or you would never have gotten that clearance. Just make
sure that you can comply with 91.177 on your random route without
exceeding 3000.

And when do I begin my descent out of 3000? I'm guessing only
once I pass TUGME, so let's assume that for the moment.

Well, see above. Maybe yes, maybe no.

So, I start on down from TUGME, and quickly break out right at 2500 and
see the airport. Can I then change my mind about flying the GPS-34 and
switch to the visual? I'm guessing I can, so I make a right turn,
heading 000, to get lined up for a straight-in to 29 (my preferred
runway since it puts me closest to my parking spot).

Sounds good to me so far.

Halfway to the airport, I discover I made a poor choice in breaking off
the GPS approach because suddenly I find myself in a rain shower and
quickly after that, back in IMC at 2000. I'm not worried about terrain
in the immediate vicinity because I know I'm above anything close, but I
figure a climb back to the MSA makes sense anyway, so I do that.

No problem. MSA is 3000 and your clearance is to cruise 3000. Since
you never reported vacating 3000, it's still yours.

Now
what? If I decide to climb to 3000 and head back to TUGME for another
GPS approach, am I still operating within my cruise clearance?

Well, since you have yet to complete an approach, I can't see why not.

I guess the gist of my question is, does the cruise clearance let me fly
a single approach, or does it let me stooge around in the vicinity of
the airport trying multiple approaches until I get in or give up?

I would think the latter. Remember, you got that clearance because
you're the only idiot flying around there. You were given a big block
of airspace, and you own it until you either cancel IFR or report that
you can't get in and need to do something else.

Michael

Careful on that one.

"Jim Weir" wrote in message
...

I don't know about the rest of ye all, but the real world out here is to
be
vectored as low as the controller can give you, get the airport in sight,
and
"cancelling IFR". That way the 1000 & 3 does not apply.

Jim




Roy Smith
shared these priceless pearls of wisdom:

-
-The MSA has little to do with it. The MSA is an emergency altitude with
-no regulatory meaning (at least in the US). What's important is that
-you've got the weather minimums for a visual approach (1000 & 3) and
-that ATC can issue you a clearance to descend low enough that you can
-see the airport (or the aircraft you're following).

Jim Weir (A&P/IA, CFI, & other good alphabet soup)
VP Eng RST Pres. Cyberchapter EAA Tech. Counselor
http://www.rst-engr.com

Uhh, I'd check that one. A year or two ago there was an article in IFR or IFR
Refresher about this subject. FAA busted some guy who cancelled when clear of
the clouds because he was not legal for VFR. IIRC, the guy busted had like 750
and 6+. The gist of the article was that unless you were in legal VFR you can't
cancel in the air.

Otis Winslow wrote:

Careful on that one.

"Jim Weir" wrote in message
...

I don't know about the rest of ye all, but the real world out here is to
be
vectored as low as the controller can give you, get the airport in sight,
and
"cancelling IFR". That way the 1000 & 3 does not apply.

Jim


--
--Ray Andraka, P.E.
President, the Andraka Consulting Group, Inc.
401/884-7930 Fax 401/884-7950
email
http://www.andraka.com

"They that give up essential liberty to obtain a little
temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety."
-Benjamin Franklin, 1759

Yes, there was an article like that.
But didn't it turn out that the article was a fabrication?
I think it was one of those "It could have happened..." stories.
That sort of journalism appalls me.
---JRC---

"Ray Andraka" wrote in message =
...
Uhh, I'd check that one. A year or two ago there was an article in =
IFR or IFR
Refresher about this subject. FAA busted some guy who cancelled when =
clear of
the clouds because he was not legal for VFR. IIRC, the guy busted had =
like 750
and 6+. The gist of the article was that unless you were in legal VFR =
you can't
cancel in the air.
=20
Otis Winslow wrote:
=20
Careful on that one.

"Jim Weir" wrote in message
...

I don't know about the rest of ye all, but the real world out here =
is to
be
vectored as low as the controller can give you, get the airport in =
sight,
and
"cancelling IFR". That way the 1000 & 3 does not apply.

Jim

=20
--
--Ray Andraka

Ray Andraka wrote in
:

Uhh, I'd check that one. A year or two ago there was an article in
IFR or IFR Refresher about this subject. FAA busted some guy who
cancelled when clear of the clouds because he was not legal for VFR.
IIRC, the guy busted had like 750 and 6+. The gist of the article was
that unless you were in legal VFR you can't cancel in the air.

Depends on where you are. In Class E, you need 1000/3 to be VFR. In Class
G, it's legal. If you're landing to an uncontrolled airport with a Class E
surface area, you need to wait until you're on the ground. If you're out
in the boonies with a 1200', or even a 700', floor, you should be ok
cancelling in the air, as long as you're below the floor of the Class E
airspace.

--
Regards,

Stan

(Michael) wrote in message . com...
(Snowbird) wrote
My guess is what I've run into is someone who knows if he
waits to clear me until I report the airport in sight, the
chances that he'll have lost both radar contact and comms
with me are pretty high, and has decided to simplify his
life.

That sounds realistic. On the other hand, the controller has an
option that is just as simple and not contrary to regulation. The
option is a cruise clearance. That allows you to shoot any approach,
which presumably includes the visual and preserves the option of
shooting a SIAP if you don't get the airport in sight, or the contact
if the vis isn't quite good enough for the visual.

Well, there isn't an SIAP and IIRC one can't fly a contact approach
to an airport without an SIAP.

But otherwise, I think you've got a great point. A cruise clearance
would accomplish exactly what we both want, and be perfectly legal.

Cheers,
Sydney

Stan Gosnell wrote in message ...

I have to agree that center is incorrect in giving a clearance for a visual
when you don't have the airport in sight. A cruise clearance would be more
appropriate. OTOH, once you receive the clearance, it's not your
responsibility to worry about the legality of ATC issuing it. The only
problem can be that you can't find the airport, or not see the airport when
you get to it. Then you have to get a clearance for an approach, and
center will have to come up with something. You can always request a
cruise clearance. Center may or may not issue it, but it's perfectly OK to
ask for one at any time.

I think that's likely what we'll do next time.

I make no bones about declining a visual approach if I have any doubts
about my ability to remain clear of clouds and find the airport. Even
if I'm having my arm twisted really really hard by ATC. If I have such
doubts I'll be amending my destination to one which has an SIAP.

One thing I haven't seen mentioned on this thread (maybe it has been
and I missed it) is that a visual approach explicitly has no missed
approach segment and IMO the pilot has to consider this carefully when
making a decision as to whether or not to accept a visual approach.
If one isn't able to complete the visual, instructions are "remain
clear of clouds and contact ATC". There are plenty of places we've
met where this can put the pilot in a cleft stick, if he accepts the
visual and in fact can't make it in -- stuck at an altitude where
radio reception is tenuous or where a long wait may be necessary in
order to clear the pilot under non-radar rules.

Cheers,
Sydney