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 question
On the most recent Pilots Audio Update, the narrator was talking about a
time when fog covered half the airport, but he could see the runway he was going to land on, but because the control tower was on the foggy half of the airport, they wouldn't approve a visual approach. He was being vectored all around, and thought it ironic that he never lost sight of the runway. Could he had gotten a contact approach if he'd asked for it? -- Paul Tomblin http://xcski.com/blogs/pt/ Can't get out of 'vi'? Common problem. Don't worry, I'm here to help. Just log in as root and type "init 0". It works for pretty much any problem you might have with Linux. No, no, no. Thank /you/. -- Mikey Raeder |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
Sure. The onus is on the pilot to navigate to the runway using terrain
features, etc. I don't think that a request for a contact approach would ever be denied. Bob Gardner "Paul Tomblin" wrote in message ... On the most recent Pilots Audio Update, the narrator was talking about a time when fog covered half the airport, but he could see the runway he was going to land on, but because the control tower was on the foggy half of the airport, they wouldn't approve a visual approach. He was being vectored all around, and thought it ironic that he never lost sight of the runway. Could he had gotten a contact approach if he'd asked for it? -- Paul Tomblin http://xcski.com/blogs/pt/ Can't get out of 'vi'? Common problem. Don't worry, I'm here to help. Just log in as root and type "init 0". It works for pretty much any problem you might have with Linux. No, no, no. Thank /you/. -- Mikey Raeder |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
"Paul Tomblin" wrote in message ... On the most recent Pilots Audio Update, the narrator was talking about a time when fog covered half the airport, but he could see the runway he was going to land on, but because the control tower was on the foggy half of the airport, they wouldn't approve a visual approach. He was being vectored all around, and thought it ironic that he never lost sight of the runway. Could he had gotten a contact approach if he'd asked for it? He could if the reported ground visibility was at least one mile and an instrument approach procedure for the airport had been published and was functioning. |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
"Bob Gardner" wrote in message ... Sure. The onus is on the pilot to navigate to the runway using terrain features, etc. I don't think that a request for a contact approach would ever be denied. If the reported ground visibility is less than one mile or no operating instrument approach procedure exists for the airport a contact approach must be denied. |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
This happens all the time here. East half of the airport, including the
ASOS, is 0/0. West half is clear and a million.. No contact approach allowed. Better off to do an instrument approach and just break it off as soon as you receive the clearance. Ask for the full approach if it will take you near or over the airport and then just break off and land if you can get an approach and landing clearance. Nothing says you have to actually go out and do the approach. Paul Tomblin wrote: On the most recent Pilots Audio Update, the narrator was talking about a time when fog covered half the airport, but he could see the runway he was going to land on, but because the control tower was on the foggy half of the airport, they wouldn't approve a visual approach. He was being vectored all around, and thought it ironic that he never lost sight of the runway. Could he had gotten a contact approach if he'd asked for it? |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
My bad...I thought that flight visibility prevailed. Answered without
bothering to research. Bob "Steven P. McNicoll" wrote in message ink.net... "Bob Gardner" wrote in message ... Sure. The onus is on the pilot to navigate to the runway using terrain features, etc. I don't think that a request for a contact approach would ever be denied. If the reported ground visibility is less than one mile or no operating instrument approach procedure exists for the airport a contact approach must be denied. |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
Bob Gardner wrote:
Sure. The onus is on the pilot to navigate to the runway using terrain features, etc. I don't think that a request for a contact approach would ever be denied. There are certainly reasons for a contact approach to be denied (conflict with other traffic, for example). I think what you're trying to say is that ATC won't try to second-guess that you have the required visibility if you make the approach. |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
wrote in message ... Conflict with what other traffic? ATC doesn't need to second guess anything. The required visibility is reported visibility, not flight visibility. Actually, it's both. |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
Newps wrote: This happens all the time here. East half of the airport, including the ASOS, is 0/0. West half is clear and a million.. No contact approach allowed. Better off to do an instrument approach and just break it off as soon as you receive the clearance. Ask for the full approach if it will take you near or over the airport and then just break off and land if you can get an approach and landing clearance. Nothing says you have to actually go out and do the approach. Once a clearance for an approach is issued, the pilot is bound by the appropriate segments of the approach (Part 97) and the applicable parts of 91.175. Any "short cut" with either a contact, visual, or cancellation is a legal no-no. |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
wrote in message ... Never would have thought of this, but it seems plausible enough, now that you mention it. Although there is a regulation that says that the pilot is required to use a prescribed "instrument letdown" when cleared for an approach, or something like that. I wonder, would this be a violation of that? No. That regulation begins with "Unless otherwise authorized by the Administrator", and FAR Part 1 defines "Administrator" as "the Federal Aviation Administrator or any person to whom he has delegated his authority in the matter concerned." |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
GPS approach question | Matt Whiting | Instrument Flight Rules | 30 | August 29th 08 03:54 AM |
GPS approach question | Matt Whiting | Instrument Flight Rules | 8 | November 1st 04 10:51 PM |
VOR/DME Approach Question | Chip Jones | Instrument Flight Rules | 47 | August 29th 04 05:03 AM |
Canadian holding procedures | Derrick Early | Instrument Flight Rules | 24 | July 22nd 04 04:03 PM |
Established on the approach - Checkride question | endre | Instrument Flight Rules | 59 | October 6th 03 04:36 PM |