contact approach

MSUDAWG

Well-Known Member
While having a discussion with some guys about some things, this discussion about a contact appch came up. During a contact approach, i know you have to maintain a visual reference to the runway, lights or a known ground reference have 1 mile viz and clear of clouds....Does anyone know if following a preceding aircraft is an ok reference for a contact approach and if so what is the FAR? thanks
 
While having a discussion with some guys about some things, this discussion about a contact appch came up. During a contact approach, i know you have to maintain a visual reference to the runway, lights or a known ground reference have 1 mile viz and clear of clouds....Does anyone know if following a preceding aircraft is an ok reference for a contact approach and if so what is the FAR? thanks

A contact approach does not require a pilot to maintain visual with the runway, lights or known ground reference. The only requirement for a contact approach is the reported ground visibility at your destination is 1 SM. The contact approach also must be made at an airport that has a SIAP. ATC may not assign this type of approach.

A visual approach requires 1000' ceiling and 3 SM visibility. The pilot must have the airport or preceding, identified aircraft in sight during the approach.
 
So when do you request Contact Approach vs Vectors to Final? Whats the point of this contact approach thing!! I dont get it... knowing the FAR number and requirments aint enough. thats rote learning
 
so you dont get vectored 15 + miles from the airport when you can land using a contact appch (similar to a visual) without having to fly a standard instr appch
 
Imagine trying to follow someone with 1 mile visibility....yikes! It's been a while since I've read about contact approaches but I'm pretty sure from an ATC standpoint, we cannot have you follow an aircraft on a contact approach.
 
So when do you request Contact Approach vs Vectors to Final? Whats the point of this contact approach thing!! I dont get it... knowing the FAR number and requirments aint enough. thats rote learning

The only time I flew one was to get in quick at an uncontrolled airport. I didn't want to waste time getting vectored for the approach so I asked for the contact approach.
 
Alot of times we hear the ATC saying fly heading 030 join the localizer inbound without actually clearing the pilot for any instrument approaches. i thought that was some sort of contact approach but then again the pilot must request it so i guess it's not.. what confuses me is you'd ask for contact cuz the weather is below VFR and cant get visual right?? well why would you wanna take chances with vis as low as 1 mile? unless you're familiar with the airport you're flying into, it's not a safe way to get in just because you dont wanna waste time getting vectored or burn more fuel.
 
I can't think of very many situations where a contact approach is useful. First off, I would limit it to only airports that I were very familiar with, including landmarks on my proposed flight path. Secondly, I would forget asking for one if there are a lot of IFR inbounds - no way you're going to get to cut in line and maybe screw up approach's planning. Bottom line is that I'd only think about asking for one is if I were in a small, slow aircraft, and in a position where I was very comfortable that I could navigate to the airport and not hit anything, and it would save me considerable time compared to getting vectored for an approach, and there wasn't a line of planes already on approaches into the field. Other than that type of situation I just don't see the usefulness of a contact approach.
 
So when do you request Contact Approach vs Vectors to Final? Whats the point of this contact approach thing!! I dont get it... knowing the FAR number and requirments aint enough. thats rote learning

Actually there are several different types of "visual" maneuvers out there.

First, a visual approach. Basically you need 1000' and 3, like Merit said. You are required to remain clear of clouds, and maneuver yourself to the airport. You must have either the airport or the preceeding aircraft in sight.

Next, a contact approach. It has lower mins, (1 mile vis) and can only be requested by the pilot. Why would you? Well, say that you are very familiar with the airport that you are flying into and can in your estimation safely maneuver to land, but the airport has less than 1000' and 3mi.

Next is a Charted Visual Flight Procedure (CVFP). Say for example this one: http://204.108.4.16/d-tpp/0707/00285TURNPIKE_VIS4LR.PDF The idea is the procedure is conducted in VFR, and the weather minimums printed on the plate would allow for VFR cloud clearances at the minimum vectoring altitude where the procedure begins. The point of this one is that on a procedure based on visual references you might be able to sequence in traffic faster than on an instrument procedure. But unlike a visual approach, the pilot has to fly the depicted ground track, rather than his own maneuvering to align with the runway.

And lastly, an instrument approach with a visual segment. Like this one: http://204.108.4.16/d-tpp/0707/06053ID1_11.PDF. Notice that after the missed approach point at 4 DME you are directed to fly visually for 2.7 nm to the airport. I was also trying to find the one into Chang Kai Shek, in Taipei, but I can't seem to find a source for it. I think it's the ILS 05/DME. Anyway, you had to turn over this building-thingy with an orange and white checkerboard painted on top. It was like a 30 degree turn at only about a couple hundred feet.
 
I have only done 1 contact and that was coming into MEM one night when WX wasnt great but I actually had the airport in site...They were landing 18 using the ILS and we requested the contact to runway 27 since we could maintain clear and 1 mi...it worked great and we got in without being #2000 for the ILS at MEM with all the FDX arrivals going to 18...
 
Alot of times we hear the ATC saying fly heading 030 join the localizer inbound without actually clearing the pilot for any instrument approaches. i thought that was some sort of contact approach but then again the pilot must request it so i guess it's not...

Nope, it's not. You'll hear, "track the localizer" quite frequently and here's why:

Remember a clearance consists of 3 basic pieces. Those pieces are ROUTING, ALTITUDE, and CLEARANCE LIMIT. Every clearance contains those parts, but frequently you may not be able to identify all of them. Also frequently the clearance limit is sort of a "who cares?" or a technicality concept. Particularly on vectors.

For example, when you first start getting vectors to an ILS, the controller will say, "these will be vectors for the ILS (that's the clearance limit- up to but not including the ILS), fly heading 020 (routing), and descend and maintain 3000 (Altitude)". Of course the clearance limit part of that doesn't really matter THAT much, because it's not like you are ever going to get to your clearance "limit" and have to hold, since your routing is a vector. And a vector continues FOREVER.

So typically right before starting an approach you'll hear the controller say something like, "Turn left heading 040, descend and maintain 2,200, until established on a segment of the approach, and then cleared the ILS runway 07."

So again, we have the three pieces. Routing was 040 heading and then follow the ILS procedure to the runway to the missed approach procedure (because every clearance for an approach clears you for the missed approach or alternate climbout instructions also). The Altitude was 2,200 and then whatever was published in the instrument procedure, all the way through the missed approach procedure. And the clearance limit was the missed approach procedure.

But sometimes he'll say, "fly heading 040 and track the localizer inbound, descend and maintain 2200".

This means something different. Routing is 040 and then the localizer. But Altitude clearance has changed, since you must stay at 2200. You can't descend yet. Also, your clearance limit is still up to but not including the approach (although this is really more of a technicallity than anything else, since it's not like you'll have to hold at your clearance limit, since he told you to track the localizer).

So the simplest difference is the altitude. "Cleared the approach" means the routing and the altitudes on the approach. "Track the localizer" means follow the localizer, but you're not allowed to descend to the altitudes depicted on the plate yet.
 
I was also trying to find the one into Chang Kai Shek, in Taipei, but I can't seem to find a source for it. I think it's the ILS 05/DME. Anyway, you had to turn over this building-thingy with an orange and white checkerboard painted on top. It was like a 30 degree turn at only about a couple hundred feet.

Are you talking about the ole KaiTak airport IGS Rwy 13?
Where you're to fly the ILS to minimums just to see the checkerboard panel on top of the hill and then make a steep right turn to rwy 13!
 
I can't think of very many situations where a contact approach is useful.

I think it's not very useful except for when it's REALLY USEFUL!!!

Perfect example . . . I fly into MKL every morning at just about the time the tower is opening. I approach from the east-northeast, and the ILS is for runway 2. Memphis Center can give me vectors (sloppy, long vectors) for the ILS, or I can fly the whole procedure. Either one will crunch my schedule. Now, I won't compromise safety, but I'm always looking for a way to save some time while staying safe.

So, Memphis Center can get me down to 2100 feet close to the airport. The weather is scattered or broken at 1000, and the visibility is two miles. I'm RIGHT OVER THE AIRPORT, and can see it right there through a whole. I can get through that hole with no problem, and fly a tight pattern. But, alas . . . I need 3 miles to shoot a visual . . . :(

Oh, well . . . we aren't allowed to do contact approaches at my company . . . I wish we could, though!!:D
 
I can't think of very many situations where a contact approach is useful.
<snip>
Bottom line is that I'd only think about asking for one if I were in a small, slow aircraft, and in a position where I was very comfortable that I could navigate to the airport and not hit anything, and it would save me considerable time compared to getting vectored for an approach, and there wasn't a line of planes already on approaches into the field. Other than that type of situation I just don't see the usefulness of a contact approach.

I think it's not very useful except for when it's REALLY USEFUL!!!

Perfect example . . . <snip>

For a second there I thought you were disagreeing with me. On second reading I'm thinking that we're saying the same thing, just using different words, eh?

:p
 
Its a way to save time by not having to get vectors or fly the whole procedure when the visibility is not quite good enough for a visual. I would not recommend a contact approach unless you either do see the airport or are extreemely familiar with the landmarks surrounding the approach course you'll be flying. The only airports I'd have ever asked for a contact approach for would have been OAK on the 27s or MER on 31 because I'd landed on those runways so many times that I had every road, house, fence, and field out to a 10 mile final memorized and could get in by following them. Even then I'd probably be tempted to just take an ILS unless I could see the airport like in Lloyd's example.
 
Are you talking about the ole KaiTak airport IGS Rwy 13?
Where you're to fly the ILS to minimums just to see the checkerboard panel on top of the hill and then make a steep right turn to rwy 13!


That's exactly the one I was looking for. Any idea where a copy of the approach plate can be found? I don't even know for sure if the airport is still open or not, but it's a great "instructional tool" for guys looking for weird approaches.

(By the way, folks, that's how CFI's/Military instructors have fun. Let's see who can find the funkiest, strangest, most dangerous or odd approaches in the world.... Other people play cards or go to the movies, or learn to play an instrument or raise their kids or something! But not us!) :D
 
That's exactly the one I was looking for. Any idea where a copy of the approach plate can be found? I don't even know for sure if the airport is still open or not, but it's a great "instructional tool" for guys looking for weird approaches.

(By the way, folks, that's how CFI's/Military instructors have fun. Let's see who can find the funkiest, strangest, most dangerous or odd approaches in the world.... Other people play cards or go to the movies, or learn to play an instrument or raise their kids or something! But not us!) :D

that apporoach was actually taken out, but if you go out youtube, you can see millions of videos on it. The airport is just a public GA airport now I believe (hell I don't know if there any GA flying over there but... lol)
[yt]zMpLaKJYxp8[/yt]

here is a somewhat of a weird app plate for it

kt13.gif
 
Back
Top