Contact Approaches

AggieMike88

AggieMike88

Touchdown! Greaser!
Joined
Jan 13, 2010
Messages
20,804
Location
Denton, TX
Display Name
Display name:
The original "I don't know it all" of aviation.
AIM 5-4-25 explains Contact Approaches well enough. But I'm having trouble getting a handle of when to use them. Can you guys provide some examples of practical applications?
 
As a pilot I have never used it, nor as a controller issued it.
 
Just say no.

ETA: someone here will say "they are not issued so no need to say no". My point is... "Just say no to contact approaches".
The restrictions far outweigh the benefits. They're just not worth it IMO.
 
Last edited:
AggieMike88 said:
AIM 5-4-25 explains Contact Approaches well enough. But I'm having trouble getting a handle of when to use them. Can you guys provide some examples of practical applications?
Click to expand...

There you are, and you know exactly where "there" is and how to get to the end of the runway using ground references. You also know where the bad weather is and you don't want to fly through it. ATC, though, is giving you vectors toward the rain, so they can take you clear around to the other side of the airport by about 10 miles to bring you back through the thunder on the ILS. Request a contact.

dtuuri
 
AggieMike88 said:
AIM 5-4-25 explains Contact Approaches well enough. But I'm having trouble getting a handle of when to use them. Can you guys provide some examples of practical applications?
Click to expand...

I've heard of people using them...but rarely. Much like special VFR, they will never be offered they can only be requested. And, like special VFR, once a clearance is given the pilot is taking on the full responsibility of remaining within the clearance limits. Which essentially means that you won't lose contact.

As far as how it would work...you're in IMC and flying over an airport toward an approach fix. Flying the full approach will take you another 10 minutes and a storm is approaching from the west. As you're passing over the airport on your way to the IAF a hole opens up under you and there is the runway. You determine that if you start down now you can stay out of the clouds and maintain visual separation from any obstacles or other traffic. You ask for (and receive) a contact approach so you chop power and start circling down toward the end of the runway.

There is a lot to take into account.
 
jason said:
I've heard of people using them...but rarely. Much like special VFR, they will never be offered they can only be requested. And, like special VFR, once a clearance is given the pilot is taking on the full responsibility of remaining within the clearance limits. Which essentially means that you won't lose contact.

As far as how it would work...you're in IMC and flying over an airport toward an approach fix. Flying the full approach will take you another 10 minutes and a storm is approaching from the west. As you're passing over the airport on your way to the IAF a hole opens up under you and there is the runway. You determine that if you start down now you can stay out of the clouds and maintain visual separation from any obstacles or other traffic. You ask for (and receive) a contact approach so you chop power and start circling down toward the end of the runway.

There is a lot to take into account.
Click to expand...


Visual Approach - A visual approach is conducted on an IFR flight plan and authorizes a pilot to proceed visually and clear of clouds to the airport. The pilot must have either the airport or the preceding identified aircraft in sight. This approach must be authorized and controlled by the appropriate air traffic control facility. Reported weather at the airport must have a ceiling at or above 1,000 feet and visibility 3 miles or greater. ATC may authorize this type approach when it will be operationally beneficial. Visual approaches are an IFR procedure conducted under IFR in visual meteorological conditions. Cloud clearance requirements of 14 CFR Section 91.155 are not applicable, unless required by operation specifications.

Contact Approach - Pilots operating in accordance with an IFR flight plan, provided they are clear of clouds and have at least 1 mile flight visibility and can reasonably expect to continue to the destination airport in those conditions, may request ATC authorization for a contact approach.

Note the difference between the requirements for reported and flight visibilty. So anytime the reported vis/ceiling is less than 3 mi/1000, the controller may not issue a visual approach, but the pilot may request a contact approach with 1 mile vis and clear of clouds. The controller may continue radar service including minimum vectoring altitudes for terrain and is required to separate IFR and special vfr traffic.
 
Last edited:
Clip4 said:
Visual Approach - A visual approach is conducted on an IFR flight plan and authorizes a pilot to proceed visually and clear of clouds to the airport. The pilot must have either the airport or the preceding identified aircraft in sight. This approach must be authorized and controlled by the appropriate air traffic control facility. Reported weather at the airport must have a ceiling at or above 1,000 feet and visibility 3 miles or greater. ATC may authorize this type approach when it will be operationally beneficial. Visual approaches are an IFR procedure conducted under IFR in visual meteorological conditions. Cloud clearance requirements of 14 CFR Section 91.155 are not applicable, unless required by operation specifications.

Contact Approach - Pilots operating in accordance with an IFR flight plan, provided they are clear of clouds and have at least 1 mile flight visibility and can reasonably expect to continue to the destination airport in those conditions, may request ATC authorization for a contact approach.

Note the difference between the requirements for reported and flight visibilty. So anytime the reported vis/ceiling is less than 3 mi/1000, the controller may not issue a visual approach, but the pilot may request a contact approach with 1 mile vis and clear of clouds. The controller may continue radar service including minimum vectoring altitudes for terrain and is required to separate IFR and special vfr traffic.
Click to expand...


Yes. You are correct. He said that he knew the technical parts but wanted a more colloquial explanation. That's what I was giving.
 
AggieMike88 said:
AIM 5-4-25 explains Contact Approaches well enough. But I'm having trouble getting a handle of when to use them. Can you guys provide some examples of practical applications?
Click to expand...

You're arriving at your home field in IMC. You spot the runway while on a downwind vector for an SIAP. You request a contact approach and are so cleared. From that point you're just flying the pattern in SVFR conditions.
 
Last edited:
Extremely useful when you are within sight of the runway or its environment, can see that the weather is not worse in that direction, know where the terrain and obstructions are, and want to avoid having to follow a lengthy instrument approach that will take you farther away, possibly through worse weather. Like any other powerful tool, must be used carefully and correctly.
 
Two major factors in determining if you need a contact approach. Lack of time and familiarity with your surroundings.

Only issued it once doing ATC. F-18 shot thru final because the RFC couldn't get radar on him. I told the pilot I'd have to box him out for another PAR. He immediately declared minimum fuel and a contact. Caught me by surprise because those guys never did them. Couldn't give him the visual because the vis was less than 3 miles. Cleared him for a contact. Screwed my whole plan up but no one swapped paint so I guess it was alright.:D
 
Think of times you'd have asked for a visual approach but the airport isn't legally VMC. The one time I've done this is when I was legally in IMC but below the overcast and had the ground (well the water, this was over the Chesapeake) in sight. If I asked for the approach, ATC would have had to climb me back into the soup and vector me way over the eastern shore to pick up the published approach.
 
Velocity173 said:
Two major factors in determining if you need a contact approach. Lack of time and familiarity with your surroundings.

Only issued it once doing ATC. F-18 shot thru final because the RFC couldn't get radar on him. I told the pilot I'd have to box him out for another PAR. He immediately declared minimum fuel and a contact. Caught me by surprise because those guys never did them. Couldn't give him the visual because the vis was less than 3 miles. Cleared him for a contact. Screwed my whole plan up but no one swapped paint so I guess it was alright.:D
Click to expand...

yeah those 90 degree intercepts can be tough :D

had arrival guy do that to me one day but I knew it was coming and as soon as pilot checked in I gave him a ridiculous turn to final that worked.
 
AggieMike88 said:
AIM 5-4-25 explains Contact Approaches well enough. But I'm having trouble getting a handle of when to use them. Can you guys provide some examples of practical applications?
Click to expand...

My DPE, who used to fly a G5 for Toyota, talked about a good example of it happening to him a few years ago. They were landing Long Beach and the fog marine layer had rolled in as it quite often does there during summers. They went down to minimums and went missed. But on the climbout he could see the other rwy end, as the fog only covered half the airport. He asked for a contact approach (you have to ask for it), swung her round visually and landed in the opposite direction.
 
mscard88 said:
yeah those 90 degree intercepts can be tough :D

had arrival guy do that to me one day but I knew it was coming and as soon as pilot checked in I gave him a ridiculous turn to final that worked.
Click to expand...

Well this particular case I gave RFC a good 30 degree intercept. He just had his antenna in the wrong piece of sky. New guy.

I should've stuck to my guns and done what works for my pattern. Instead, I bent over backwards to help a min fuel by giving him a contact to a crossing runway with an H-46 doing hover checks on it! Things went south after that.:(
 
dtuuri said:
There you are, and you know exactly where "there" is and how to get to the end of the runway using ground references. You also know where the bad weather is and you don't want to fly through it. ATC, though, is giving you vectors toward the rain, so they can take you clear around to the other side of the airport by about 10 miles to bring you back through the thunder on the ILS. Request a contact.

dtuuri
Click to expand...

Exactly why I called one at Pensacola. Field was under a manageable overcast (so I could not see it when I was over it while being vectored for the approach, for which I was number whoknows behind a bunch of Navy trainers, the vectoring was going to take me through nasty convective goo, and I could see clear to the bay from which navigation to the field is cake.

I told App I could accept a Contact Approach, and he could not gave moved faster to clear me for it. I was on the ramp before the next guy in landed.

Big improvement in safety (for me), and saved controller some work. Win-win.
 
Velocity173 said:
Well this particular case I gave RFC a good 30 degree intercept. He just had his antenna in the wrong piece of sky. New guy.
QUOTE]

I had just checked out and they were screwing with me, but after 3-4 of those that I handled they gave up! :D
Click to expand...
 
At Port Angeles, WA, the airport is a couple of hundred feet above and the (long....08/26) runway is parallel to the Strait of Juan de Fuca. There is a crossing runway, 13/31, that is shorter...the approach to 13 is over the water and there is a clear-cut in the trees beneath the approach path.

One not-so-fine day the control zone was IFR (yes, it was that long ago). I can't recall why I did not shoot the ILS to rwy 8, but in any event I was flying over the strait about 500 feet above the surface in good VFR. I got clearance for a contact approach from Whidbey Approach, flew along until I saw the clear-cut in the trees, turned to line up with rwy 13, and there was this nice runway for me to land on.

Bob Gardner
 
Another example:

Your home field doesn't have an instrument approach procedure but an adjacent airport has an ILS, LPV, etc. You file to the better-equipped airport, fly the ILS, LPV etc. approach at that airport until you break out of the clouds, then request a contact approach over to your home aerodrome. Note: Best to notify ATC of your intentions prior to the approach. 1 mile visibility and clear of clouds is all you need.

Word to the wise: This procedure can be very useful but can also be very dangerous. You're basically scud running below the clouds, at a low altitude, with low visibility which creates the possibility of you hitting something on the way over to your home field. Also, the weather can close in on you at a moments notice and your IFR again with nothing more than a contact approach clearance. You are now violating regs. Not good. If you know the terrain extremely well, know where every obstacle is located and are confident the weather is not rapidly changing, contact approaches can be very useful, especially for those of us not based at a field with a SIAP.
 
Maxed-out said:
Another example:

Your home field doesn't have an instrument approach procedure but an adjacent airport has an ILS, LPV, etc. You file to the better-equipped airport, fly the ILS, LPV etc. approach at that airport until you break out of the clouds, then request a contact approach over to your home aerodrome. .
Click to expand...

When I worked Eglin AFB Tower there's a grass strip east of the final for 19. They'd shoot the ILS19, breakout, cancel, and go land at the grass strip. As you stated, we knew in advance what they wanted to do especially since they couldn't land at the base.
 
Maxed-out said:
Your home field doesn't have an instrument approach procedure but an adjacent airport has an ILS, LPV, etc. You file to the better-equipped airport, fly the ILS, LPV etc. approach at that airport until you break out of the clouds, then request a contact approach over to your home aerodrome. Note: Best to notify ATC of your intentions prior to the approach. 1 mile visibility and clear of clouds is all you need.
Click to expand...
I'm not sure I'd make that statement over the air when the AIM pretty much tells you that you SHOULD NOT do that with contact approaches.

Nor is it intended for an aircraft to conduct an instrument approach to one airport and then, when “in the clear,” discontinue that approach and proceed to another airport.​
 
mscard88 said:
When I worked Eglin AFB Tower there's a grass strip east of the final for 19. They'd shoot the ILS19, breakout, cancel, and go land at the grass strip. As you stated, we knew in advance what they wanted to do especially since they couldn't land at the base.
Click to expand...
That's common enough, but I've never heard of a *contact* approach to a field without an SIAP (as opposed to just scud running VFR to the nearby field as in your example). In fact, I was taught that one of the limitations of a contact is that the field has to have an SIAP. I would like a reference if this is wrong.
 
Maxed-out said:
Another example:

Your home field doesn't have an instrument approach procedure but an adjacent airport has an ILS, LPV, etc. You file to the better-equipped airport, fly the ILS, LPV etc. approach at that airport until you break out of the clouds, then request a contact approach over to your home aerodrome. Note: Best to notify ATC of your intentions prior to the approach. 1 mile visibility and clear of clouds is all you need.

Word to the wise: This procedure can be very useful but can also be very dangerous. You're basically scud running below the clouds, at a low altitude, with low visibility which creates the possibility of you hitting something on the way over to your home field. Also, the weather can close in on you at a moments notice and your IFR again with nothing more than a contact approach clearance. You are now violating regs. Not good. If you know the terrain extremely well, know where every obstacle is located and are confident the weather is not rapidly changing, contact approaches can be very useful, especially for those of us not based at a field with a SIAP.
Click to expand...

As others have pointed out, this would be illegal, since you can't fly contact to an airport without an IAP.
Perhaps you are confusing it with just cancelling IFR once below the clouds and proceeding VFR to a nearby airport?
 
I agree that you can't do a contact approach to another field without an IAP, but very often you CAN do an approach at a field to legally get below the area minimum IFR altitudes to break out in VFR conditions - cancel and shuttle over to the nearby field.

I lived in two places where this was very common - both had large airports on ridges, with my small homebase airport in the valley below. If the weather was below VFR, we just landed at the first field. Without doing this, many return trips would not have been possible. Note this is NOT scud running, but it does get you below a cloud deck that ATC can't vector you below unless you are on a legal approach nearby.
 
Maxed-out said:
Another example:

Your home field doesn't have an instrument approach procedure but an adjacent airport has an ILS, LPV, etc. You file to the better-equipped airport, fly the ILS, LPV etc. approach at that airport until you break out of the clouds, then request a contact approach over to your home aerodrome. Note: Best to notify ATC of your intentions prior to the approach. 1 mile visibility and clear of clouds is all you need.
Click to expand...

No can do. A contact approach requires an operating instrument approach at the airport of intended landing. You can possibly fly an approach at a nearby airport and cancel, then proceed VFR to your destination.
 
Last edited:
azure said:
That's common enough, but I've never heard of a *contact* approach to a field without an SIAP (as opposed to just scud running VFR to the nearby field as in your example). In fact, I was taught that one of the limitations of a contact is that the field has to have an SIAP. I would like a reference if this is wrong.
Click to expand...

The field must have an operating SIAP.
 
Most likely getting SVFR confused with a contact. We used to give a PAR to a guy who had a field just outside the D. He'd get below, cancel and we'd clear him to depart SVFR. Can't clear him for a contact because he had no IAP for his field.
 
flyingron said:
Think of times you'd have asked for a visual approach but the airport isn't legally VMC. The one time I've done this is when I was legally in IMC but below the overcast and had the ground (well the water, this was over the Chesapeake) in sight. If I asked for the approach, ATC would have had to climb me back into the soup and vector me way over the eastern shore to pick up the published approach.
Click to expand...

Basically.
 
Its your home base. You see the RR tracks and know you can land visually below you. There is a hole. It allows you to drop down through the hole and follow the RR tracks. Its dicey. I doubt any Commercial OP Spec would allow it. But they all have deice and turbo. But it can be done.
 
At KCCR, the head controller knows me as "The guy that flies contact approaches" as in I am the only one. Here is why I do it.

Concord often gets a haze over it limiting ones ability to see the airport from the valley and the airport sits in a somewhat industrial zone, making it difficult to see.
If I let them vector me to give me the visual, they often can't get me close enough from the angle I want to come in at before I actually can make out the runways.
I am 100% positive, I have seen it many times, pilots lie and say they have the airport in sight when they don't. Conditions are VFR so what the heck right its not exactly hard to find.
Instead of lying, I just say I want a contact approach. All I have to do is remain clear of clouds and they can let me go well before I actually have the visual.

I also do this when the clouds are scattered low and a few clouds are obscuring my view of the airport but I can maneuver easily around them. Passenger really enjoy this because you can get really close to clouds and turn and fun stuff like that but never actually go in them so it isn't "scary"

I will say I haven't used a contact approach away from concord though. Just makes more sense to fly the full approach at an unfamiliar airport.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top