Is a visual approach part of an IAP and if so.........

[mrivc211]

Here's one question I'll throw at you guys.............is a visual approach part of an instrument approach procedure. If so, is there a published missed approach off of one? And if there is not a MAP off of a visual approach, what do you do if you have to go missed?

Also, what conditions must exist to request a visual approach?

How about a contact approach?

Have fun!

 

[Kingairer]

Is this a question or a Quiz?

 

[mtsu_av8er]

[ QUOTE ]
Is this a question or a Quiz?

[/ QUOTE ]

Sound like one of Craig's Instrument stages, huh??

 

[JEP]

I just happen to be studying up for my Instrument written so here we go:
[ QUOTE ]
is a visual approach part of an instrument approach procedure.

[/ QUOTE ]
</edit>Yes(maybe), ATC may tell you to expect the visual approach. If you had to go missed I believe you would just follow the published or the missed instructions that ATC has given.</edit>
[ QUOTE ]
Also, what conditions must exist to request a visual approach?

[/ QUOTE ]
Would you even request one? My experience has been that ATC will tell you to expect the visual for rwXYZ. You must have the apt. or proceeding aircraft in sight.

[ QUOTE ]
How about a contact approach?

[/ QUOTE ]
A contact approach must be requested and you must be able to remain clear of clouds and 1 mile vis.

Be kind. As I said I am still studying but I think I have it pretty close.

 

[IrishSheepdog]

[ QUOTE ]
Here's one question I'll throw at you guys.............is a visual approach part of an instrument approach procedure.

Yes and no; mostly no. It is not an instrument approach, but an approach under instrument flight rules.

If so, is there a published missed approach off of one?

No.

And if there is not a MAP off of a visual approach, what do you do if you have to go missed?

Per tower instructions. If you are flying a visual approach into a non-towered airport, call missed on CTAF, then call center/approach/etc. on previous frequency.

Also, what conditions must exist to request a visual approach?

VFR cloud clearance requirements throughout the entire approach.

How about a contact approach?

1 mile, clear of clouds. Normally not done in 121 operations.


[/ QUOTE ]

 

[IrishSheepdog]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Also, what conditions must exist to request a visual approach?

[/ QUOTE ]
Would you even request one? My experience has been that ATC will tell you to expect the visual for rwXYZ. You must have the apt. or proceeding aircraft in sight.

[/ QUOTE ]

You can request one. Often times an airport will be calling for an ILS approach, but the clouds and visibility can be enough to fly a visual approach. For instance, airport at 600 feet elevation, clouds reported as 2900 BKN, 4000 OVC, with visibility 9 miles. The airport might be calling for an ILS to the active runway 27, however you know that coming from the west you will most likely be able to see the airport and fly a pattern visual approach should approach let you below 3000-3500 feet. MVA by ATC might be 2500 feet, so they can descend you to that, call the airport, and get the visual.

In my example above, if you were coming from the east (straight in to runway 27) it's just easier to fly the ILS approach via vectors, so no need to worry about requesting the visual.

 

[MikeD]

Don't forget about CVFPs, or Charted Visual Flight Procedures. PHX has some in the Power Plant Visual and Freeway Visual. They're pretty much just ground reference's to follow, but they are examples of a formal "procedural" visual approach, if you will.

 

[FL270]

MikeD is right about charted visuals. However, they (like other visual approaches) do not incorporate a "missed approach" procedure in the formal sense. Were I to initiate a go-around from a visual approach, I would climb on runway heading and report the missed to the tower. Typically, the tower will promptly give you a heading, altitude, and departure frequency, after which you'll be vectored around to have another go at it. At a non-towered airport, do exactly as Chicaga said ... unless of course you can just remain VFR and do another circuit, then that is probably the simpler thing to do.

 

[B767Driver]

[ QUOTE ]
I just happen to be studying up for my Instrument written so here we go:
[ QUOTE ]
is a visual approach part of an instrument approach procedure.

[/ QUOTE ]
</edit>Yes(maybe), ATC may tell you to expect the visual approach. If you had to go missed I believe you would just follow the published or the missed instructions that ATC has given.</edit>
[ QUOTE ]



A visual approach is an IFR authorization that is not an IAP. There is no MAP segment associated with a visual approach...so if you cannot land, you are essentially executing a go/around...not a missed approach. (For semantics...it's important to know that there is a difference between a Missed Approach, a Go/Around, and a Balked Landing.)

Additionally, under Part 91 the cloud clearance requirements of 91.155 do not apply when flying a visual approach...you are fine to just remain clear of clouds. However, under Part 135/121 where Operations Specifications are issued by the FAA, 91.155 must be complied with (cloud clearance requirements must be met).

Since a Visual Approach is an IFR authorization...remember to cancel your IFR flight plan when on the ground...if at a non-towered airport.

 

[pilot602]

IFR Refresher magazine has a great article on CVIAPs this month. Worth checking out if you can find a copy. They are – according to the article – essentially not much more than charted noise abatement procedures. And, they are predicting we'll be seeing more of them in the future.

 

[Bog]

Asking for a visual approach is a great idea in Mexico, unless you really like flying VOR approaches. Plus, it gives you a little more leeway in checking out the beaches... to look at the hotels, of course.

 

[Bog]

Just had this situation the other day. We were cleared for the visual to 7R in PHX, following a Beechjet. Spacing was good, everything appeared fine. However, the Beechjet took about 20 minutes to clear the runway. I allowed my FO to do pretty low, but finally had to tell him to go around because the &#^% were rolling down the runway at about 1mph.

As soon as we were on the go and I gave my best "I'm p!ssed" call of "We're going around," the tower controller promptly came back with a heading and altitude to get us out of the way. Had we flown the published missed approach, we would have been causing conflicts with other aircraft on the arrival.

So, basically, there is no missed approach procedue for a visual, and always expedite clearing the runway when there's someone behind you. /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/banghead.gif

 

[MikeD]

[ QUOTE ]
Just had this situation the other day. We were cleared for the visual to 7R in PHX, following a Beechjet. Spacing was good, everything appeared fine. However, the Beechjet took about 20 minutes to clear the runway. I allowed my FO to do pretty low, but finally had to tell him to go around because the &#^% were rolling down the runway at about 1mph.

As soon as we were on the go and I gave my best "I'm p!ssed" call of "We're going around," the tower controller promptly came back with a heading and altitude to get us out of the way. Had we flown the published missed approach, we would have been causing conflicts with other aircraft on the arrival.

So, basically, there is no missed approach procedue for a visual, and always expedite clearing the runway when there's someone behind you. /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/banghead.gif

[/ QUOTE ]

Did you accelerate level to 250 and pull up into the closed pattern at the departure end? /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/bandit.gif /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif

 

[Bog]

[ QUOTE ]
Did you accelerate level to 250 and pull up into the closed pattern at the departure end? /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/bandit.gif /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif

[/ QUOTE ]

250 feet? Yeah, we did. /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/cwm27.gif

Sure sure, rub it in that your plane is better than mine. /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/Smilecrunch.gif

 

[MikeD]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Did you accelerate level to 250 and pull up into the closed pattern at the departure end? /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/bandit.gif /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif

[/ QUOTE ]

250 feet? Yeah, we did. /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/cwm27.gif

Sure sure, rub it in that your plane is better than mine. /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/Smilecrunch.gif

[/ QUOTE ]

Nothing to rub in, Bog. At least you actually get to hand fly your plane......I'm an overglorified systems manager now! /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/frown.gif

 

[derg]

[ QUOTE ]
Here's one question I'll throw at you guys.............is a visual approach part of an instrument approach procedure. If so, is there a published missed approach off of one? And if there is not a MAP off of a visual approach, what do you do if you have to go missed?

Also, what conditions must exist to request a visual approach?

How about a contact approach?

Have fun!

[/ QUOTE ]

Visual approaches really don't have a missed approach procedure. In fact, if you execute the published missed approach while under radar surveillance, they're probably going to freak out!

It's actually a little more complicated. There's a "missed approach", a "go around" and a "rejected landing".

A good way to think about it would be an instrument approach will either terminate in a landing or a missed approach; or if you're already past the missed approach fix, a rejected landing

A visual approach will terminate in either a landing or a go around

With a rejected landing, you're going to have to look at any terrain avoidance instructions on hte back of your 10-9 page

 

[xdashdriver]

[ QUOTE ]

Additionally, under Part 91 the cloud clearance requirements of 91.155 do not apply when flying a visual approach...you are fine to just remain clear of clouds. However, under Part 135/121 where Operations Specifications are issued by the FAA, 91.155 must be complied with (cloud clearance requirements must be met).

[/ QUOTE ]

Glad someone pointed that out, it's quite a significant difference between 91 and 135/121 ops.

Ray