Captain
Final Approach
There's a note that that approach isn't authorized when the restricted area is active.
not enough visibility?
- Thread starter olasek
- Start date
There's a note that that approach isn't authorized when the restricted area is active.
alfadog
Final Approach
Roger. The base of 2505 and 2506 is surface. So the other must be used when the the R-area is active and you run the risk of being screwed if you go missed late?
Yes, with the ground (only thing required) in sight and 2 miles of vis, good to continue. It' an approach where the PIC is required thought on where to bale out of the situation. There's nothing in front of you to hit for a pretty fair distance.
Everskyward
Experimenter
- Joined
- Mar 19, 2005
- Messages
- 33,453
- Display Name
Display name:
Everskyward
Captain
Final Approach
R-2505 goes from the surface all the way up to outer space. It's listed as "surface and above".
That said, if I had to bail I'd take my chance with busting R-2505 over busting the mountain on the left.
poadeleted20
Deleted
- Joined
- Apr 8, 2005
- Messages
- 31,250
Yes.
We might also want some reasonable assurance we'll be able to safely complete the approach to a landing (I.e., no localized fog bank right on the airport, which is where the ASOS or other available weather info might be useful), but that's not specifically addressed in the FAA guidance. But yes, that's why the guidance talks about planning ahead in case you can't complete the approach to a landing.
Everskyward
Experimenter
- Joined
- Mar 19, 2005
- Messages
- 33,453
- Display Name
Display name:
Everskyward
The LOC/DME E at Aspen doesn't have a "fly visual" segment.
http://aeronav.faa.gov/d-tpp/1204/05889LDE.PDF
Flying h4x0r
Pre-Flight
That's what I'd do. Legal or not, I don't feel comfortable at my level of experience to continue past the MAP without the runway environment. Just FYI--a little technical correction, the 2 mi vis is what is required to descend below MDA, not necessarily to land.
alfadog
Final Approach
Yes. Easy approach if R is quiet. If active, go missed at MAP if ANY doubt of making it. That is what I would expect of you if my family was in your airplane
And that is what I am sure you would do. Thanks.
Exactly, big rocks beat airspace. The risk in the R, especially during IMC is pretty much an administrative risk. The risk the other way is more firmly set. Too bad Cory Liddle and his instructor didn't make that jump to logic and bust the bottom edge of the B instead of a building.
alfadog
Final Approach
This one (and others like it, I guess) is unusual in that you legally and properly fly past the MAP but might still have to go missed. In this case, I am sure ATC will help you out and you will not get in trouble for following ATC directions into active restricted airspace.
edit: it would also behoove you to ask for the missed instructions to follow if you have to miss past the MAP before you reach it.
edit: it would also behoove you to ask for the missed instructions to follow if you have to miss past the MAP before you reach it.
Last edited:
Captain
Final Approach
That's weird. It does on my Jepp dated 11 Nov 11.
Captain
Final Approach
Yes. Easy approach if R is quiet. If active, go missed at MAP if ANY doubt of making it. That is what I would expect of you if my family was in your airplane
I assure you if I were flying this approach I'd see the runway or approach lights at the MAP or I'd be off to somewhere else. All of my comments on this thread have been for academic discussion only.
HPNPilot1200
En-Route
That is strange. Jepp shows a fly visual segment passed CEYAG (MAP) but NACO does not.
Everskyward
Experimenter
- Joined
- Mar 19, 2005
- Messages
- 33,453
- Display Name
Display name:
Everskyward
If you look at the notes on the approach chart and compare Aspen to Eagle you'll see that the LOC/DME E in Aspen doesn't mention a fly visual segment. I see what you mean about the dashed line with a heading, though. Physically it would be pretty impossible to get all the way to CEYAG and land straight in from the MDA. You would need to circle. The difference between the two approaches is that Aspen's is a circling approach and Eagle's is straight in only (although they did have a similar circling approach a number of years ago).
Last edited:
aterpster
En-Route
- Joined
- Apr 15, 2011
- Messages
- 3,317
- Display Name
Display name:
aterpster
NACO does.
Fly visual to airport is authorized day only. At night the visibility minimum is 5 miles and fly visual to airport is not authorized. In other words in the daytime you do not have to have one of the 91.175 required visual references in sight at the MAP. At night you do.
The authority for all of this is in TERPs, then restated in the AIM:
TERPs:
3.3.2 d. (1) Visibility greater than 3 SM. Where the HATh is 1000 ft or higher, 3 SM visibility may be established with Flight Standards approval when the procedure is annotated "Fly Visual to Airport."
Note 1:
"Fly Visual to Airport" provides relief from visual reference requirements specified in Part 91.175, and related rules such as 121.651, 135.225, and 125.381. This option will only be approved where deemed safe and operationally beneficial.
Everskyward
Experimenter
- Joined
- Mar 19, 2005
- Messages
- 33,453
- Display Name
Display name:
Everskyward
HPNPilot1200 was referring to Aspen, not Eagle, though. The LOC-DME E at Aspen isn't even authorized at night.
HPNPilot1200
En-Route
The profile view on the LOC/DME-E into ASE shows a missed approach beginning at CEYAG. The other chart discussed in this thread, the RNAV Y into IYK shows a dashed line and "fly visual to airport" note in the profile view at the MAP. Why is the fly visual dashed marking not depicted on the ASE approach in question?
aterpster
En-Route
- Joined
- Apr 15, 2011
- Messages
- 3,317
- Display Name
Display name:
aterpster
aterpster
En-Route
- Joined
- Apr 15, 2011
- Messages
- 3,317
- Display Name
Display name:
aterpster
"Fly visual to airport" is not authorized in the ASE LOD/DME-E.
HPNPilot1200
En-Route
The Jeppesen chart depicts a visual flight track which does not agree with the NACO version of the chart.
Attachments
aterpster
En-Route
- Joined
- Apr 15, 2011
- Messages
- 3,317
- Display Name
Display name:
aterpster
The Jeppesen chart depicts a visual flight track which does not agree with the NACO version of the chart.
That is Jeppesen's charting style for when the distance from the MAP to the threshold is greater than the visibilty minimum. Nonetheless, without the words "Fly visual to airport" the visual reference requirements of 91.175 apply at the MAP.
HPNPilot1200
En-Route
The words "fly visual to airport" are not found on the Jeppesen version of the RNAV Y Rwy 2 at IYK. They are included on the NACO version. How would I know that the visual reference requirements of 91.175 do not apply at the MAP on that approach using the Jeppesen chart?
aterpster
En-Route
- Joined
- Apr 15, 2011
- Messages
- 3,317
- Display Name
Display name:
aterpster
You go by the chart you use. In this case one of them is wrong. You could ask Jeppesen. They have to maintain copies of the source.
poadeleted20
Deleted
- Joined
- Apr 8, 2005
- Messages
- 31,250
While I'm sure that's true, I don't see it happening without some very fast coordination to stop whatever is happening in that R-area, which isn't likely to be accomplished. On this approach, do not count on having that option.
alfadog
Final Approach
Then it goes back to my follow-up...
"edit: it would also behoove you to ask for the missed instructions to follow if you have to miss past the MAP before you reach it."
Captain
Final Approach
I disagree. They move that MAP back because they are out of options. They can't turn you left because of dirt and they can't turn you right because of airspace. The MAP is moved back to a point where they can give you an 'out' that is TERPs compliant...in this case a hard right turn. If you continue the approach past that on the visual segment then you are on your own.
Go and ask for missed approach instructions in that situation and you're going to get "fly the published" what else can he do? Turn you into the mountain? Clear you through the restricted airspace that goes to space? No. He can't. I suppose you could ask, but I don't think it's going to happen.
alfadog
Final Approach
Interesting. All the more reason to go missed at the MAP if you do not have clear view of the threshold. Can you find out the schedule of the restricted in advance so you are sure of getting the better approach?
aterpster
En-Route
- Joined
- Apr 15, 2011
- Messages
- 3,317
- Display Name
Display name:
aterpster
Jeppesen is wrong. See attached source document.
poadeleted20
Deleted
- Joined
- Apr 8, 2005
- Messages
- 31,250
You can ask, but the controller is under no obligation to provide them, and may not be able to do so if you're not in radar coverage all the way and the controller doesn't know the point from which you will be executing it.
As I said, there is nothing wrong with choosing not to continue past the MAP without the runway environment in sight, but if you do, your risks increase and you are more on your own to have a plan to get out of there if you do have to, so choose wisely based on all available information and the conditions at that time.
Last edited:
Not clear on why I need to see the threshold to safely continue. If I know where I am, know where I have to go and can see the ground, I can get there, Hwy 14 takes me to town then I turn right. Airports aren't exactly small targets.
Last edited:
aterpster
En-Route
- Joined
- Apr 15, 2011
- Messages
- 3,317
- Display Name
Display name:
aterpster
They won't give you the Z version when the airspace is in use. By flying the Y you are responsible for being visual for the last five miles, no different that going into the airport VFR. I know that area well and a VFR airplane simply should not get into the restricted area. Also, by the time you get near the airport you can remain visual and be assured of landing even if you have to fly the traffic pattern to get your turn.
Captain
Final Approach
Okay, you continue with the 3 miles and when you find the field there is a plane on the runway hooked up to a tug. No what? Circle? Okay, but you're pretty boxed in and only have those 3 miles of Vis. That's the point I think. If you're going to proceed you do so at your own risk. The TERPs can't help you here.
I'm thinking that's the whole point of a visual procedure on an IAP. The TERPs get you as far as they can with their established protections, but when it gets to the point where the TERPs simply CAN'T give you an out then they slap a visual segment on there and let the pilot assume the responsibility.
I've never really thought about any of this before and am glad I read this thread. Btw, I've shown this approach to a few people at work and all the confusion of page one of this thread was right there. I think I'll forward it on to the training department and let them dissect it and get the word out if they choose.
pericynthion
Pre-takeoff checklist
Flying a pattern in 3 miles vis (or even less than that) isn't exactly rocket surgery, but you're right that it does put a little more responsibility on the pilot.
aterpster
En-Route
- Joined
- Apr 15, 2011
- Messages
- 3,317
- Display Name
Display name:
aterpster
Jepp will be adding the note.
The issue isn't TERPs, it's when R-2505 is in use. Note TERPs works fine for the "Z" IAP. That's for when they can let you fly through a bit of the restricted area.
alfadog
Final Approach
Yes, but my question is, if I know that I am flying there tomorrow and IFR is forecast, can I find out then if the restricted area will be active the next day?
HPNPilot1200
En-Route
Have you been there? There is a highway that runs at the base of those mountains N-S, hwy 14 IIRC, that takes you right into town. The MAP drops you right on it. Make a right at the first major intersection (actually Either, it's a small town)and that takes you to the airport, it's a simple IFR approach, I Follow Roads. It's pretty obvious that's what they expect you to do.
As far as own risk, yep, man up and have a plan. There's 3 runways, take a pick. If they can't circle an airport at a few hundred feet and keep it in sight with 2 miles of vis, I don't think that someone should attempt this approach.
Last edited:
John Collins
En-Route
I scanned thru the responses, but did not see the correct interpretation for the fly visual note. My apologies if someone did describe it correctly and I missed it. I was the one who wrote the FAA and pointed out that there was no guidance in the AIM on this subject. They agreed and later added the wording that is now found in the AIM.
The fly visual to airport note indicates that at the missed approach point at the MDA or DA, the pilot must have the approach minimum flight visibility to continue to the airport. You do not have to meet the requirements of 91.175 to descend to the airport from the MDA/DA. At the stated visibility minimum, you could not see the runway or any of the other cues and that is why it must be a visual maneuver. You must maintain visual cloud separation and are responsible for your own terrain avoidance. Since altitude is the pilot's discretion, you can fly the approach as you choose and do not need to remain at an MDA/DA until you see the runway. You can maneuver as required to maintain cloud and terrain separation. On this particular approach, I would remain at the MDA until the MAP at BISAC and use the charted VDA or advisory glidepath to continue to the runway because the visual segment is clear on a 34 to 1 slope. Regardless, this is a visual maneuver and you must remain in the stated visual conditions once you are below the MDA or beyond the MAP.
You should be very confident that you can complete the approach, because once you are past the MAP at the MDA or below the MDA, you are on your own if you need to miss the approach. This is similar to the problem of missing an approach after circling has commenced, only worse. Often the reason for the "fly visual to the airport" has to do with the climb criteria of 200 feet per NM required if you start the miss at the MAP and at the MDA. You should examine the DP or ODP and have a plan in mind as to how you would execute a miss once you are pat the MAP or below the MDA. This planning should be done before you leave the ground on departure.
If you have another choice for the approach that doesn't have a "fly visual to airport" note, undoubtedly it will require a higher than standard rate of climb noted on the chart.
The TERPS state:
The fly visual to airport note indicates that at the missed approach point at the MDA or DA, the pilot must have the approach minimum flight visibility to continue to the airport. You do not have to meet the requirements of 91.175 to descend to the airport from the MDA/DA. At the stated visibility minimum, you could not see the runway or any of the other cues and that is why it must be a visual maneuver. You must maintain visual cloud separation and are responsible for your own terrain avoidance. Since altitude is the pilot's discretion, you can fly the approach as you choose and do not need to remain at an MDA/DA until you see the runway. You can maneuver as required to maintain cloud and terrain separation. On this particular approach, I would remain at the MDA until the MAP at BISAC and use the charted VDA or advisory glidepath to continue to the runway because the visual segment is clear on a 34 to 1 slope. Regardless, this is a visual maneuver and you must remain in the stated visual conditions once you are below the MDA or beyond the MAP.
You should be very confident that you can complete the approach, because once you are past the MAP at the MDA or below the MDA, you are on your own if you need to miss the approach. This is similar to the problem of missing an approach after circling has commenced, only worse. Often the reason for the "fly visual to the airport" has to do with the climb criteria of 200 feet per NM required if you start the miss at the MAP and at the MDA. You should examine the DP or ODP and have a plan in mind as to how you would execute a miss once you are pat the MAP or below the MDA. This planning should be done before you leave the ground on departure.
If you have another choice for the approach that doesn't have a "fly visual to airport" note, undoubtedly it will require a higher than standard rate of climb noted on the chart.
The TERPS state:
alfadog
Final Approach
I think a couple folk in the thread had it right and what you say was certainly where the thread ended up.