Another Canadian difference?

I know that in Canada, when you're cleared for the approach, you can start
descending to the MSA. But today while being vectored for the LOC/DME RWY
12 at Oshawa, I was told "turn 030 for the base leg", and then I almost
immediately blew right through the localizer. Was I supposed to take that
as a clearance to intercept the loc?

I called him back, and he turned me to 150 and gave me a more normal
sounding approach clearance.

--
Paul Tomblin http://xcski.com/blogs/pt/
"I complained that finding a solution to problems with Microsoft software
would be impossible if profanity was blocked, as few people can discuss
Microsoft's programs without using profanity." DarrylJ on alt.folklore.urban

* Paul Tomblin :
I know that in Canada, when you're cleared for the approach, you can start
descending to the MSA. But today while being vectored for the LOC/DME RWY
12 at Oshawa, I was told "turn 030 for the base leg", and then I almost
immediately blew right through the localizer. Was I supposed to take that
as a clearance to intercept the loc?

Although I'm not a real pilot, and not familiar with Canadian regulations,
I dare to speculate: "certainly not!.". That would have gone along the
lines of "cleared for the localizer 12" or "turn 030 and intercept
localizer 12". Intercepting the localizer would have meant that you
would have had to change your heading, and the only clearance you had
was for 030.

I called him back, and he turned me to 150 and gave me a more normal
sounding approach clearance.

Perhaps that was his original plan anyway (to let you cross the localizer
and intercept from the other side).


Best regards,
Daniel

I don't know about Canada, but in the US,

1) a vector is not an approach clearance - you need to hear the magic
words, "cleared for the XXX approach"; and

2) a clearance for an approach is not a clearance to descend to the MSA
- you must fly at or above the altitudes indicated for the approach.

The MSA is just meant to be guidance on obstructions near some
reference point (e.g., airport or navaid).

The MSA is just meant to be guidance on obstructions near some
reference point (e.g., airport or navaid).

Correct for the U.S. In the countries that accept PANS-OPS, MSAs are area
operational altitudes, like the rare RNAV TAAs in the U.S.

Although Canada uses TERPs, they design MSAs to be operational altitudes.

In a previous article, "rps" said:
I don't know about Canada, but in the US,

I know all that. That's why I specifically asked about CANADIAN
DIFFERENCES. And in Canada, you quite definitely CAN descend to the MSA
once you're cleared for the approach.


--
Paul Tomblin http://xcski.com/blogs/pt/
"I'm fairly sure Linux exists principally because writing an operating system
probably seems like a good way to pass the bignum months of darkness in
Finland" - Rodger Donaldson

In a previous article, Daniel Roesen said:
* Paul Tomblin :
I called him back, and he turned me to 150 and gave me a more normal
sounding approach clearance.

Perhaps that was his original plan anyway (to let you cross the localizer
and intercept from the other side).

I've had that happen before, but usually because the controller forgot
about me or didn't realize I was getting blown into the localizer. This
time there wasn't much wind, and he'd only just been talking to me a few
seconds before the localizer started to tickle.

I've always thought that a good controller will warn you that he's about
to vector you through. "Base leg" sounds like he wanted me to do a normal
square pattern.

--
Paul Tomblin http://xcski.com/blogs/pt/
The people here have other bones to pick -- possibly including yours.
-- Mike Andrews

No -- just like in the U.S., you need to hear the magic words "cleared
for ... approach" and read them back. The controller mentioned the
base leg to help your situational awareness (though his or her
situational awareness must have been a bit off, to shoot you through
the LOC like that).


All the best,


David