If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
Contact Approach -- WX reporting
It was briefly mentioned in one of the longer threads that a contact
approach requires 1 sm reported ground visibility. It reminded me that I had flown a contact approach some 8 months ago to an airport about 15 minutes after the tower had closed (there is no automated weather available) and couldn't land because fog and low clouds had rolled in. So did approach control screw up? I'm sure they had the last ATIS report some 70 to 80 minutes old at the time of my request, and the weather was good in that report. Interestingly, both the AIM and the 7110.65 say that a requirement for ATC authorization of a contact approach is that "The reported ground visibility is at least 1 statute mile." But the AIM starts out by saying: "Pilots operating in accordance with an IFR flight plan, provided they are clear of clouds and have at least 1 mile flight visibility and can reasonably expect to continue to the destination airport in those conditions, may request ATC authorization for a contact approach." |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
Contact Approach -- WX reporting
|
#3
|
|||
|
|||
Contact Approach -- WX reporting
The pilot requests a contact approach and ATC can approve if
the most recent [weather is considered current for one hour] was reported as 1 SM. A visual appraoch may be requested by the pilot or initiated by ATC if visual requirements are meet. In any case the pilot may refuse the clearance. In addition, if visibility drops below the required minimum, the pilot is required to report and get/resume IFR procedures. AIM 5-4-22. Visual Approach a. A visual approach is conducted on an IFR flight plan and authorizes a pilot to proceed visually and clear of clouds to the airport. The pilot must have either the airport or the preceding identified aircraft in sight. This approach must be authorized and controlled by the appropriate air traffic control facility. Reported weather at the airport must have a ceiling at or above 1,000 feet and visibility 3 miles or greater. ATC may authorize this type approach when it will be operationally beneficial. Visual approaches are an IFR procedure conducted under IFR in visual meteorological conditions. Cloud clearance requirements of 14 CFR Section 91.155 are not applicable, unless required by operation specifications. b. Operating to an Airport Without Weather Reporting Service. ATC will advise the pilot when weather is not available at the destination airport. ATC may initiate a visual approach provided there is a reasonable assurance that weather at the airport is a ceiling at or above 1,000 feet and visibility 3 miles or greater (e.g., area weather reports, PIREPs, etc.). c. Operating to an Airport With an Operating Control Tower. Aircraft may be authorized to conduct a visual approach to one runway while other aircraft are conducting IFR or VFR approaches to another parallel, intersecting, or converging runway. When operating to airports with parallel runways separated by less than 2,500 feet, the succeeding aircraft must report sighting the preceding aircraft unless standard separation is being provided by ATC. When operating to parallel runways separated by at least 2,500 feet but less than 4,300 feet, controllers will clear/vector aircraft to the final at an angle not greater than 30 degrees unless radar, vertical, or visual separation is provided during the turn-on. The purpose of the 30 degree intercept angle is to reduce the potential for overshoots of the final and to preclude side-by-side operations with one or both aircraft in a belly-up configuration during the turn-on. Once the aircraft are established within 30 degrees of final, or on the final, these operations may be conducted simultaneously. When the parallel runways are separated by 4,300 feet or more, or intersecting/converging runways are in use, ATC may authorize a visual approach after advising all aircraft involved that other aircraft are conducting operations to the other runway. This may be accomplished through use of the ATIS. d. Separation Responsibilities. If the pilot has the airport in sight but cannot see the aircraft to be followed, ATC may clear the aircraft for a visual approach; however, ATC retains both separation and wake vortex separation responsibility. When visually following a preceding aircraft, acceptance of the visual approach clearance constitutes acceptance of pilot responsibility for maintaining a safe approach interval and adequate wake turbulence separation. e. A visual approach is not an IAP and therefore has no missed approach segment. If a go around is necessary for any reason, aircraft operating at controlled airports will be issued an appropriate advisory/clearance/instruction by the tower. At uncontrolled airports, aircraft are expected to remain clear of clouds and complete a landing as soon as possible. If a landing cannot be accomplished, the aircraft is expected to remain clear of clouds and contact ATC as soon as possible for further clearance. Separation from other IFR aircraft will be maintained under these circumstances. f. Visual approaches reduce pilot/controller workload and expedite traffic by shortening flight paths to the airport. It is the pilot's responsibility to advise ATC as soon as possible if a visual approach is not desired. g. Authorization to conduct a visual approach is an IFR authorization and does not alter IFR flight plan cancellation responsibility. REFERENCE- AIM, Canceling IFR Flight Plan, Paragraph 5-1-14. h. Radar service is automatically terminated, without advising the pilot, when the aircraft is instructed to change to advisory frequency. 5-4-23. Charted Visual Flight Procedure (CVFP) a. CVFPs are charted visual approaches established for environmental/noise considerations, and/or when necessary for the safety and efficiency of air traffic operations. The approach charts depict prominent landmarks, courses, and recommended altitudes to specific runways. CVFPs are designed to be used primarily for turbojet aircraft. b. These procedures will be used only at airports with an operating control tower. c. Most approach charts will depict some NAVAID information which is for supplemental navigational guidance only. d. Unless indicating a Class B airspace floor, all depicted altitudes are for noise abatement purposes and are recommended only. Pilots are not prohibited from flying other than recommended altitudes if operational requirements dictate. e. When landmarks used for navigation are not visible at night, the approach will be annotated "PROCEDURE NOT AUTHORIZED AT NIGHT." f. CVFPs usually begin within 20 flying miles from the airport. g. Published weather minimums for CVFPs are based on minimum vectoring altitudes rather than the recommended altitudes depicted on charts. h. CVFPs are not instrument approaches and do not have missed approach segments. i. ATC will not issue clearances for CVFPs when the weather is less than the published minimum. j. ATC will clear aircraft for a CVFP after the pilot reports siting a charted landmark or a preceding aircraft. If instructed to follow a preceding aircraft, pilots are responsible for maintaining a safe approach interval and wake turbulence separation. k. Pilots should advise ATC if at any point they are unable to continue an approach or lose sight of a preceding aircraft. Missed approaches will be handled as a go-around. 5-4-24. Contact Approach a. Pilots operating in accordance with an IFR flight plan, provided they are clear of clouds and have at least 1 mile flight visibility and can reasonably expect to continue to the destination airport in those conditions, may request ATC authorization for a contact approach. b. Controllers may authorize a contact approach provided: 1. The contact approach is specifically requested by the pilot. ATC cannot initiate this approach. EXAMPLE- Request contact approach. 2. The reported ground visibility at the destination airport is at least 1 statute mile. 3. The contact approach will be made to an airport having a standard or special instrument approach procedure. 4. Approved separation is applied between aircraft so cleared and between these aircraft and other IFR or special VFR aircraft. EXAMPLE- Cleared contact approach (and, if required) at or below (altitude) (routing) if not possible (alternative procedures) and advise. c. A contact approach is an approach procedure that may be used by a pilot (with prior authorization from ATC) in lieu of conducting a standard or special IAP to an airport. It is not intended for use by a pilot on an IFR flight clearance to operate to an airport not having a published and functioning IAP. Nor is it intended for an aircraft to conduct an instrument approach to one airport and then, when "in the clear," discontinue that approach and proceed to another airport. In the execution of a contact approach, the pilot assumes the responsibility for obstruction clearance. If radar service is being received, it will automatically terminate when the pilot is instructed to change to advisory frequency. "Newps" wrote in message . .. | | | wrote: | It was briefly mentioned in one of the longer threads that a contact | approach requires 1 sm reported ground visibility. It reminded me that | I had flown a contact approach some 8 months ago to an airport about 15 | minutes after the tower had closed (there is no automated weather | available) and couldn't land because fog and low clouds had rolled in. | | So did approach control screw up? I'm sure they had the last ATIS | report some 70 to 80 minutes old at the time of my request, and the | weather was good in that report. | | So you're saying that the controllers are the weather observers there? | That would put it in a gray area. The book states that weather must be | available. If you received the clearance before the tower closed that | would be OK. | | | | | Interestingly, both the AIM and the 7110.65 say that a requirement for | ATC authorization of a contact approach is that "The reported ground | visibility is at least 1 statute mile." | | But the AIM starts out by saying: "Pilots operating in accordance with | an IFR flight plan, provided they are clear of clouds and have at least | 1 mile flight visibility and can reasonably expect to continue to the | destination airport in those conditions, may request ATC authorization | for a contact approach." | | Flight viz is irrelavant. The determining factor is reported ground viz. |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
Contact Approach -- WX reporting
Newps wrote: So you're saying that the controllers are the weather observers there? That would put it in a gray area. The book states that weather must be available. If you received the clearance before the tower closed that would be OK. Yes the controllers are the weather observers. Why does that make it a gray area? I'm pretty sure the clearance came after the tower closed. I've also noticed that the approach controllers occasionally loose track of time and they don't always realize the tower has closed. Maybe that's what happened. Or the controller wasn't fresh on contact approaches, since I think its used relatively rarely around here. By the way, this is a small satellite airport under Class B and C airspace, if that makes a difference. |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
Contact Approach -- WX reporting
If visibility is at
1 mile, I think I would rather just fly the approach than pick around for the airport in those conditions - too risky. Where is the advantage? Following other traffic visually? It could shorten the time in the air. Some approaches require a ten mile detour. In low vis, you could be vectored over the airport and request a contact approach. Boom, you're down. Otherwise, it's out to the IAF, be vectored around due to traffic... finally get down ten minutes later just as fog rolls in. Jose -- "There are 3 secrets to the perfect landing. Unfortunately, nobody knows what they are." - (mike). for Email, make the obvious change in the address. |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
Contact Approach -- WX reporting
1 mile is the minimum, but if you had to fly to the fix,
possibly an NDB or VOR on or very near the airport and then fly a procedure turn, you are adding 10-15 minutes to the flight. A contact approach saves time and time is money for a freight pilot's company. Company loose money, pilot loose job. On a contact approach you do not follow anybody, you are the only airplane and you navigate to the airport directly. A visual approach may be instigated by the controller if the weather is good VFR. When the controller asks, "Cessna 123XB, do you have traffic in sight? or "Report the airport insight" the next words you'll hear will probably be "Cessna 123XB cleared for the visual." Pilots request a contact approach and a controller may approve. ATC may issue a visual approach and pilots may reject it. In any case, the pilot doing a contact approach must maintain a flight visibility of 1 sm while the controller can't issue the clearance unless the visibility is reported as 1 sm. At airports without official weather reporting, the pilot can report to ATC that visibility is such and such and he can maintain VMC and request a contact approach, the pilot become the weather observer. The advantage is that the IFR clearance is still in the system and the pilot has the "out." It keeps an active flight plan, which is nice er than canceling IFR and then nobody will look for you. "Dan" wrote in message ups.com... | Since a contact approach requires the airport to have an IFR approach, | I fail to see the advantage of a contact approach. If visibility is at | 1 mile, I think I would rather just fly the approach than pick around | for the airport in those conditions - too risky. Where is the | advantage? Following other traffic visually? | | --Dan | | | wrote: | Newps wrote: | So you're saying that the controllers are the weather observers there? | That would put it in a gray area. The book states that weather must be | available. If you received the clearance before the tower closed that | would be OK. | | Yes the controllers are the weather observers. Why does that make it a | gray area? | | I'm pretty sure the clearance came after the tower closed. I've also | noticed that the approach controllers occasionally loose track of time | and they don't always realize the tower has closed. Maybe that's what | happened. Or the controller wasn't fresh on contact approaches, since | I think its used relatively rarely around here. By the way, this is a | small satellite airport under Class B and C airspace, if that makes a | difference. | |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
Contact Approach -- WX reporting
Dan wrote: Since a contact approach requires the airport to have an IFR approach, I fail to see the advantage of a contact approach. If visibility is at 1 mile, I think I would rather just fly the approach than pick around for the airport in those conditions - too risky. Where is the advantage? Following other traffic visually? --Dan The way I see it, its the IFR equivalent of Special VFR. So you can sneak under a cloud layer and not wait 20 minutes to get the instrument approach (which is clogged by traffic at a nearby airport). There are always uses, and, yes, it can by risky. That's why pilots have to request contact approaches (they can't be assigned by ATC otherwise). |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
Contact Approach -- WX reporting
Jim Macklin wrote: At airports without official weather reporting, the pilot can report to ATC that visibility is such and such and he can maintain VMC and request a contact approach, the pilot become the weather observer. Can you really do that? A pilot's guess of ground visibility from aloft is good enough for the FAA? The advantage is that the IFR clearance is still in the system and the pilot has the "out." It keeps an active flight plan, which is nice er than canceling IFR and then nobody will look for you. I wouldn't consider search-and-rescue an "out." The only thing I can think of is that staying IFR keeps other IFR traffic out of your hair. Is there another advantage? |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
Contact Approach -- WX reporting
One advantage (without looking at the regs so beat me up) is if you are VFR
and want to make a low weather scud run into an airport where "special VFR" is NOT available. Just ask the tower for a "Contact approach" instead. Karl "Curator" worlds most hangar queeny Skywagon. "Dan" wrote in message ups.com... Since a contact approach requires the airport to have an IFR approach, I fail to see the advantage of a contact approach. If visibility is at 1 mile, I think I would rather just fly the approach than pick around for the airport in those conditions - too risky. Where is the advantage? Following other traffic visually? --Dan wrote: Newps wrote: So you're saying that the controllers are the weather observers there? That would put it in a gray area. The book states that weather must be available. If you received the clearance before the tower closed that would be OK. Yes the controllers are the weather observers. Why does that make it a gray area? I'm pretty sure the clearance came after the tower closed. I've also noticed that the approach controllers occasionally loose track of time and they don't always realize the tower has closed. Maybe that's what happened. Or the controller wasn't fresh on contact approaches, since I think its used relatively rarely around here. By the way, this is a small satellite airport under Class B and C airspace, if that makes a difference. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
VFR position reporting | Mxsmanic | Piloting | 154 | November 26th 06 04:45 PM |
OLV GPS 36 approach question | A Lieberma | Instrument Flight Rules | 59 | August 15th 06 12:32 AM |
Trust those Instruments.... Trust those Instruments..... | A Lieberman | Instrument Flight Rules | 1 | May 2nd 06 03:54 PM |
Nearly had my life terminated today | Michelle P | Piloting | 11 | September 3rd 05 02:37 AM |
"Cleared Straight-In Runway X; Report Y Miles Final" | Jim Cummiskey | Piloting | 86 | August 16th 04 06:23 PM |