Circling Approach Question

steviedeviant

steviedeviant

Pre-takeoff checklist
Joined
Nov 28, 2015
Messages
167
Location
Birmingham, Alabama
Display Name
Display name:
StevieD
This is for an upcoming checkride. I have practiced only a couple of circling approaches. Using KEET, runway 16 as an example, the opposite side is RW 34 which is right traffic. If I were in IMC, broke below the clouds to do a circling approach, would I still stick with the right traffic or could I go left side? Does that question make sense?

basically so you stick with the regular vfr traffic pattern on a circling approach?

Thx
 
steviedeviant said:
basically so you stick with the regular vfr traffic pattern on a circling approach?

Thx
Click to expand...
In my opinion, if you were in that airspace in IMC, and with a clearance, you are supposed to be the only traffic. Patterns are for VFR traffic.
 
For the circling approach on my checkride, I flew over the runway to enter a standard pattern. The DPE told me I had enough space to enter on a base leg.
Not that what I did was wrong. It just wasn't the most efficient way. So he wasn't expecting me to fly a standard pattern. YMMV
 
Maxnr said:
In my opinion, if you were in that airspace in IMC, and with a clearance, you are supposed to be the only traffic. Patterns are for VFR traffic.
Click to expand...

Huh? That is a dangerous assumption. If you are circling you have to have visual with runway and that could easily be in enough VMC with VFR traffic in the pattern. You wouldn't be circling in IMC.

A clearance does not afford you jack at an uncontrolled field in regards to possible VFR traffic separation or priority.

Unless otherwise noted in the approach, joining the pattern is always the safest answer if conditions allow because there could always be other VFR traffic.

My home runway the approach is counter to the prevailing wind runway due to terrain. SOP is to break out and if conditions allow join the pattern at my field as there is often VFR traffic under the marine layer as well as traffic possibly departing right into you.
 
Last edited:
In my experience if there is a rule it would be published on the chart. Something such as “circling not authorized to the NW”.

But.... it’s been many years since I’ve circled, and a bazillion since I’ve circled at an uncontrolled field.
 
91.126 is not a VFR rule. It is a rule applicable to all traffic pattern operations, unless there is something specifically prohibiting it or authorizing something different, the traffic pattern direction rules apply to circling approaches.

It was the subject of my 2017 Which Way to Turn article for IFR magazine. It's also briefly mentioned in the FAA's 2018 AC 90-66B, Non-Towered Airport Flight Operations
 
Blatham489 said:
Don't go below MDA even if totally visual until on final. Friend of mine did that. Busted my, I mean his ride.
Click to expand...

This statement is contrary to the requirements of 91.175(c)(1):

"no pilot may operate an aircraft, ... below the authorized MDA ... unless

(1) The aircraft is continuously in a position from which a descent to a landing on the intended runway can be made at a normal rate of descent using normal maneuvers,"

While an MDA of, say, 500 feet AGL may allow you to wait until final to start your descent, what if you're flying at Gunnison, CO (GUC)? The lowest circling MDA is 1500 AGL. If you wait until you are on final to start your descent, you can no longer do it using "normal maneuvers".

Your "friend" may have been busted for going below MDA too early, but that doesn't mean it was really for going below MDA before being on final, it was for going below MDA before being in a position to make a normal descent (in other words, descending too shallow). Or, the DPE has never seen an MDA higher than 500 feet...

The Instrument ACS does not have a standard for where to begin descent, other than that it must be a "stabilized descent". I am not sure of the wording in the old PTS.
 
midlifeflyer said:
91.126 is not a VFR rule. It is a rule applicable to all traffic pattern operations, unless there is something specifically prohibiting it or authorizing something different, the traffic pattern direction rules apply to circling approaches.

It was the subject of my 2017 Which Way to Turn article for IFR magazine. It's also briefly mentioned in the FAA's 2018 AC 90-66B, Non-Towered Airport Flight Operations
Click to expand...

It’s paragraph 9.6 in AC 90-66B. That was the subject of a not so brief thread here a year or so back.
 
Blatham489 said:
Don't go below MDA even if totally visual until on final. Friend of mine did that. Busted my, I mean his ride.
Click to expand...
Hopefully, not because he wasn't on final, because there's no such requirement. Descent from any MDA (circling or otherwise) just requires the aircraft to be "in a position from which a descent to a landing on the intended runway can be made at a normal rate of descent using normal maneuvers."
 
flyingron said:
Hopefully, not because he wasn't on final, because there's no such requirement. Descent from any MDA (circling or otherwise) just requires the aircraft to be "in a position from which a descent to a landing on the intended runway can be made at a normal rate of descent using normal maneuvers."
Click to expand...
Unfortunately there are a lot of people who limit descent to “within 30 degrees of the extended centerline” or such like. Old wives who make the rules, apparently.
 
Shawn said:
Huh? That is a dangerous assumption. If you are circling you have to have visual with runway and that could easily be in enough VMC with VFR traffic in the pattern. You wouldn't be circling in IMC.

A clearance does not afford you jack at an uncontrolled field in regards to possible VFR traffic separation or priority.

Unless otherwise noted in the approach, joining the pattern is always the safest answer if conditions allow because there could always be other VFR traffic.

My home runway the approach is counter to the prevailing wind runway due to terrain. SOP is to break out and if conditions allow join the pattern at my field as there is often VFR traffic under the marine layer as well as traffic possibly departing right into you.
Click to expand...
If circling, I assume you are still in wx less than 1'000 & 3. MDA is 700'. And there is vfr traffic in the pattern? Some outlaw doing t&g's? A SVFR trying to get home? Birmingham approach (20 mi nw) would only allow one at a time in their airspace. and you would get a hold til he calls down and clear. Remember, its Birmingham's airspace when IFR.
I used to drop into Birmingham pretty regularly, never went to Alabaster. My employer frowned on any circling approaches. Banned them at night. But always got a few in the sim. And this for a pilot roster that had many high time pilots.
A stranger arriving, cleared to circle would need to be aware of the noise abatement area to the nw. Many pilots I know would simply request a straight in(dw) if the wind was less than 5kts. 5'000 ft runway, how much do you need?
Those guys in that TRACON have always been accommodating and would likely bring you around for a straight in.
 
luvflyin said:
It’s paragraph 9.6 in AC 90-66B. That was the subject of a not so brief thread here a year or so back.
Click to expand...
The subject gets good play whenever it comes up. It's a combination of legitimate concerns a a wee bit of the "patterns are for VFR traffic" sentiment expressed earlier.
 
If circling, I assume you are still in wx less than 1'000 & 3. MDA is 700'. And there is vfr traffic in the pattern?
Click to expand...
1000 & 3 only applies to surface areas. Once you're below 700 feet in other places, a mile and clear of clouds is VFR.
 
flyingron said:
1000 & 3 only applies to surface areas. Once you're below 700 feet in other places, a mile and clear of clouds is VFR.
Click to expand...
BHM APC is listed as the controlling facility for IFR. On the top of the KEET approach plate.
 
Shelby County (EET) is only under a 700' transition area. It matters not what ATC services are available.

Ceiling is never a VFR issue there.

Flying below 700' AGL there, you only need a mile visibility and clear of clouds.
700 and above you need 3 miles visibility and 1000 feet above/500 below/2000 horizontal
cloud clearance.

Your statement demonstrates an unsafe understanding of the flight rules.
 
Walboy said:
I'd cut the OP some slack. A standard traffic pattern altitude is 1000' AGL, so ceiling certainly could be a VFR consideration.

Also, you could be in IMC somewhere on the approach while the airport is not. I think we've all seen instances where low ceilings are nearby the airport but not at the airport itself. Things are rarely neat and tidy.

If the OP were a student of mine, I would be pleased he is thinking about such things.
Click to expand...
The response was not to the OP, but to another poster who is apparently assuming no possibility of breaking out of the clouds in Class G and having a legal VFR airplane there.
 
Walboy said:
I'd cut the OP some slack. A standard traffic pattern altitude is 1000' AGL, so ceiling certainly could be a VFR consideration.
Click to expand...
No, it's not. CEILING has no bearing in this situation, just distance from clouds and visibility. I can be legal VFR a 1000' AGL with a ceiling that's lower.
Also, you could be in IMC somewhere on the approach while the airport is not.
Click to expand...
precisely.
 
flyingron said:
No, it's not. CEILING has no bearing in this situation, just distance from clouds and visibility. I can be legal VFR a 1000' AGL with a ceiling that's lower.

precisely.
Click to expand...

Hold the phone Ron, you'll need to explain that first one to me. Are you talking Class G above the deck?
 
I actually didn’t think this question would get much response. Thanks to all those who address and I learned a lot from the discussion. As I originally stated, this is for a check ride and I just wanted to clear up my thinking. Like many of you, I seriously doubt I will be doing many real life circling approaches.

Thanks.
 
Blatham489 said:
Don't go below MDA even if totally visual until on final.
Click to expand...
RussR said:
This statement is contrary to the requirements of 91.175(c)(1):

"no pilot may operate an aircraft, ... below the authorized MDA ... unless
Click to expand...
Assuming nighttime, wouldn't it be good advice (assuming TERPS still requires that obstructions that penetrate a 3° slope in the visual portion of the final approach course are supposed to be lighted)? Since the visual portion is only 8° to 9° left or right of centerline, that's where you'd normally be starting a rollout on final. Staying at MDA until rolling out on final at an unfamiliar airport and making a steeper than normal approach should protect against unknown obstacles, but introduces other potential risks, like landing too long. At some airports it can't be done at all. Aspen or Eagle come to mind.
 
dtuuri said:
Assuming nighttime, wouldn't it be good advice (assuming TERPS still requires that obstructions that penetrate a 3° slope in the visual portion of the final approach course are supposed to be lighted)? Since the visual portion is only 8° to 9° left or right of centerline, that's where you'd normally be starting a rollout on final. Staying at MDA until rolling out on final at an unfamiliar airport and making a steeper than normal approach should protect against unknown obstacles, but introduces other potential risks, like landing too long. At some airports it can't be done at all. Aspen or Eagle come to mind.
Click to expand...
Sure. That’s why a visual pattern in a jet apparently requires getting 7 or 8 miles away from the airport before turning base. 10 miles or more if flaps are inop.:rolleyes:
 
steviedeviant said:
Like many of you, I seriously doubt I will be doing many real life circling approaches.
Click to expand...

You would be surprised when they come in handy. They are quite common now for me.

Not only at my uncontrolled home field but one of my most common Delta destinations uses a VOR approach with a circle to land to bring you in. There is a RNAV when needed but it conflicts with other area airspace approaches.
 
Shawn said:
You would be surprised when they come in handy. They are quite common now for me.

Not only at my uncontrolled home field but one of my most common Delta destinations uses a VOR approach with a circle to land to bring you in. There is a RNAV when needed but it conflicts with other area airspace approaches.
Click to expand...
Heck, I did about 8 of them in one airplane before I found out I wasn’t authorized to do them yet. ;)
 
MauleSkinner said:
Sure. That’s why a visual pattern in a jet apparently requires getting 7 or 8 miles away from the airport before turning base. 10 miles or more if flaps are inop.:rolleyes:
Click to expand...
(I think you might be agreeing with me, but for the record): Then that's a visual approach, I'm addressing a night circling approach at MDA inside the circling radius. My point is you better be familiar with the unlit obstacles or you better stay at MDA until you're within the visual portion of final. If you can't stay inside that radius you could wind up like the Learjet at Eagle—plastered on a mountain side. Or like the Lear at Pellston, MI with Walter Reuther. Or the astronauts (Elliot See, Jr., and Charles A. Bassett II) in St. Louis, etc.
 
dtuuri said:
Then that's a visual approach, I'm addressing a night circling approach at MDA inside the circling radius. My point is you better be familiar with the unlit obstacles or you better stay at MDA until you're within the visual portion of final. If you can't stay inside that radius you could wind up like the Learjet at Eagle—plastered on a mountain side. Or like the Lear at Pellston, MI with Walter Reuther. Or the astronauts (Elliot See, Jr., and Charles A. Bassett II) in St. Louis, etc.
Click to expand...
I see no difference between descending below the circling MDA when circling and descending below the circling MDA in a visual pattern. The terrain/obstacles don’t care what you’re doing when you hit them.
 
MauleSkinner said:
I see no difference between descending below the circling MDA when circling and descending below the circling MDA in a visual pattern. The terrain/obstacles don’t care what you’re doing when you hit them.
Click to expand...
Well, in a visual pattern beyond the circling radius you're already below MDA, so to speak.
 
midlifeflyer said:
91.126 is not a VFR rule. It is a rule applicable to all traffic pattern operations, unless there is something specifically prohibiting it or authorizing something different, the traffic pattern direction rules apply to circling approaches.
Click to expand...
Why isn't an ATC-authorized Part 97 SIAP with a circling approach, conducted under IFR weather conditions and following any of the the prescribed paths in the AIM and Instrument Flying Handbook not (in your opinion) "authorized".
 
steviedeviant said:
I actually didn’t think this question would get much response. Thanks to all those who address and I learned a lot from the discussion. As I originally stated, this is for a check ride and I just wanted to clear up my thinking. Like many of you, I seriously doubt I will be doing many real life circling approaches.

Thanks.
Click to expand...
@steviedeviant This is something you want to talk about with the DPE. Maybe have an "off the record" discussion? Let the DPE know you know about the Chief Counsel's interpretation, but you can envision scenarios where, under IFR, it might be impractical (breaking out on a right base). What is the DPE's opinion? If the test is under VFR, ask the DPE to allow you to remove your hood in time to not disrupt the local traffic and enter the normal traffic pattern if at an uncontrolled field. Good luck to you. ;)
 
What does your CFII say, he is your best bet for an answer for a checkride is endorsing you for. If my student busted a checkride because of bad advice he got off the Internet, I would be very ****ed.
 
PaulS said:
Hold the phone Ron, you'll need to explain that first one to me. Are you talking Class G above the deck?
Click to expand...

No, I'm talking in general. There's no ceiling requirement outside surface areas (and even in surface areas it only covers operating below the ceiling).
Just because an airport is reporting a sky cover of 5/8 or more, doesn't mean that an aircraft can't be operating at a place where they are sufficiently distant from clouds (either the class E or G standards as appropriate).
 
flyingron said:
No, I'm talking in general. There's no ceiling requirement outside surface areas (and even in surface areas it only covers operating below the ceiling).
Just because an airport is reporting a sky cover of 5/8 or more, doesn't mean that an aircraft can't be operating at a place where they are sufficiently distant from clouds (either the class E or G standards as appropriate).
Click to expand...
I would like to that weather report with pics. Airport reporting stations are required to be on the field from what I understand.

Tim

Sent from my HD1907 using Tapatalk
 
dtuuri said:
Why isn't an ATC-authorized Part 97 SIAP with a circling approach, conducted under IFR weather conditions and following any of the the prescribed paths in the AIM and Instrument Flying Handbook not (in your opinion) "authorized".
Click to expand...
I thought my article made that clear. In my opinion is it's not authorized because the FAA said so. John Collins brought up that exact point in his correspondence.
 
dtuuri said:
Assuming nighttime, wouldn't it be good advice (assuming TERPS still requires that obstructions that penetrate a 3° slope in the visual portion of the final approach course are supposed to be lighted)? Since the visual portion is only 8° to 9° left or right of centerline, that's where you'd normally be starting a rollout on final. Staying at MDA until rolling out on final at an unfamiliar airport and making a steeper than normal approach should protect against unknown obstacles, but introduces other potential risks, like landing too long. At some airports it can't be done at all. Aspen or Eagle come to mind.
Click to expand...

If you take my Gunnison, CO example, and stay at MDA until you roll out on final, you will be about 1500 feet AGL at 1 mile final in a Cat A airplane. That could require as much as a 2,250 fpm descent and does not seem in any way safe, "normal", or stabilized.
 
RussR said:
If you take my Gunnison, CO example, and stay at MDA until you roll out on final, you will be about 1500 feet AGL at 1 mile final in a Cat A airplane. That could require as much as a 2,250 fpm descent and does not seem in any way safe, "normal", or stabilized.
Click to expand...
No doubt about it. That is one of the hazards of a high CDL MDA. You could descend 300 feet below MDA into the CTL controlling obstacle, less with very cold temperatures.
 
tspear said:
I would like to that weather report with pics. Airport reporting stations are required to be on the field from what I understand.

Tim

Sent from my HD1907 using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

The ceiling is based on the visible horizon. It takes into account clouds as far as can be seen from the observation point. So there can be many situations where you are beneath ‘breaks’ in the clouds, with blue sky above, are 1000 feet above, 500 below and 2000 horizontally from clouds yet be above the ‘ceiling.’
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top