Vectors to Final

[AggieMike88]

(Post edited from original. As pointed out in the first few replies, for the situation I'm questioning, I had yet to hear the "Clear for Approach" instruction. Changes are highlighted in blue bold font. -- MF )

------------------------------------------------------

I'm trying to remember the proper course of action, so a little help....

I have been cleared for I have been told earlier to expect the ILS approach with Vectors To Final, and am on the last vector before I intercept the localizer and turn inbound toward the runway. But now the controller got busy somewhere else and is late giving me the final turn instruction and the clearance and I am likely going to blow through the localizer and wind up doing a "jug handle" as one instructor called it.

Do I

1. Speak up to advise ATC that I'm expecting the instruction, like, now

2. Turn on my own and then deal with the controller (aviate, navigate, communicate)

3. Continue on assigned heading and wait for the controller to "catch up" with me and provide the instruction.


This has happened once or twice on practice approaches. But I keep forgetting to ask the CFII about it. I'll do so next time I see him. But I'm also curious as to what the folks here think.

 

[saracelica]

#3 sometimes 1 but I wouldn't do two. Worse case you blow past your intercept and atc will turn u around and get you back on track

 

[Everskyward]

They use the phrase "cleared for the approach" with the intercept instructions so I don't see how that situation would come up.

If you are just expecting the approach with vectors you should do either #1 or #3, not #2.

Note that you can be told to intercept the localizer but they don't use "cleared for the approach" until they mean the GS too.

 

[petrolero]

I'm trying to remember the proper course of action, so a little help....

I have been cleared for the ILS approach with Vectors To Final, and are on the last vector before I intercept the localizer and turn inbound toward the runway. But now the controller got busy somewhere else and is late giving me the final turn instruction and I am likely going to blow through the localizer and wind up doing a "jug handle" as one instructor called it.

Do I

1. Speak up to advise ATC that I'm expecting the instruction, like, now

2. Turn on my own and then deal with the controller (aviate, navigate, communicate)

3. Continue on assigned heading and wait for the controller to "catch up" with me and provide the instruction.


This has happened once or twice on practice approaches. But I keep forgetting to ask the CFII about it. I'll do so next time I see him. But I'm also curious as to what the folks here think.

If you've been cleared for the approach with language saying "Cleared ILS (rwy)" then you can intercept and descend with no further vectors.

If you have been given a vector but neither cleared to intercept nor cleared for the approach then, yeah, you gotta blow through final and maybe query ATC. Happens a lot, actually.

 

[Velocity173]

You said you've been cleared for the approach. You should already be on a final vector. Intercept the LOC on the last assigned vector & altitude, then proceed inbound according to the IAP.

As far as when to go off the vector to provide a smooth intercept, that's dependent on you and what type aircraft you're flying. An R22 at 90 kts isn't going to need to turn as early as a F-18 at 150 kts.

Edit: yeah, what was said above.

 

[AggieMike88]

They use the phrase "cleared for the approach" with the intercept instructions so I don't see how that situation would come up.

Very valid point.... I think I mis-represented the situation. I don't think I had yet to be cleared for the approach, but was expecting the clearance...

I'll edit post #1.

 

[jesse]

Very valid point.... I think I mis-remembered the situation. I don't think I had yet to be cleared for the approach, but was expecting the clearance...

I'll edit post #1.

If not cleared, and on a vector, I'll say something like "approach, 123 is about to fly through the localizer". They'll then wake up, turn me, and clear me for the approach. If they don't reply I remain on the vector and they get to revector me.

Only exception to where I would turn on regardless was if I had declared a fuel emergency or was taking on a bunch of ice. In which case I would turn intercept and declare as soon as the radio permitted me to do so.

"Bunch of ice" being relative to the airframe.

 

[Velocity173]

Very valid point.... I think I mis-remembered the situation. I don't think I had yet to be cleared for the approach, but was expecting the clearance...

I'll edit post #1.

The controller is required to inform you if they plan on vectoring you thru final. If they don't, query, no reply, continue on the vector. Do not turn inbound while assigned a vector.

 

[frfly172]

Never hurts to ask ,if you think your going through the localizer. He may be busy with traffic. Until cleared for the approach,and being vectored ,I wouldn't make any turns on my own.

 

[MAKG1]

#1. BTDT. If #1 doesn't work for whatever reason, #2.

Blowing through the localizer can result in attempts to penetrate solid objects.

Here's an approach I got to know well over the last month or so:https://skyvector.com/files/tpp/1511/pdf/00363I31.PDF

VTF will take you a few miles past UAD, generally at a lower altitude than the IAF at 5500. Notice the 4500 foot peak there? You don't blow through this localizer.

 

[asgcpa]

(Post edited from original. As pointed out in the first few replies, for the situation I'm questioning, I had yet to hear the "Clear for Approach" instruction. Changes are highlighted in blue bold font. -- MF )

------------------------------------------------------

I'm trying to remember the proper course of action, so a little help....

I have been cleared for I have been told earlier to expect the ILS approach with Vectors To Final, and am on the last vector before I intercept the localizer and turn inbound toward the runway. But now the controller got busy somewhere else and is late giving me the final turn instruction and the clearance and I am likely going to blow through the localizer and wind up doing a "jug handle" as one instructor called it.

Do I

1. Speak up to advise ATC that I'm expecting the instruction, like, now

2. Turn on my own and then deal with the controller (aviate, navigate, communicate)

3. Continue on assigned heading and wait for the controller to "catch up" with me and provide the instruction.


This has happened once or twice on practice approaches. But I keep forgetting to ask the CFII about it. I'll do so next time I see him. But I'm also curious as to what the folks here think.

Either 3 or 1. But don't wait too long for #3. Never 2. I usually like to speak up as I am approaching my expected inbound course. If they're busy, they will most likely tell you to continue on current heading and then revector you.

 

[Clark1961]

I've been in the OP's situation (in IMC) and posted about it here on POA. I think the general advice is that #1 is the correct thing to do and I believe some training material covers it. In my situation, Approach was busy working the dual line of airliners into DEN so they sorta forgot about me getting close to the localizer for FTG. As soon as they shut up for a second I gave them my situation at 600 wpm.

The real problem was that flying through the localizer at FTG would put me into that dual line of airliners landing at DEN. I ended up doing a "backside" localizer intercept - nope never trained for that one but it worked out okay.

So real world answer is that unless something bad is going to happen, call ATC as soon as possible when it appears one is going to fly through the localizer. If something bad is going to happen, do what ya gotta do and talk about it when ya can.

 

[Captain]

You are expected to quarry a controller if getting vectored through final. Obviously if they've already advised you that you're going to then you wouldn't....but that didn't seem to happen in the OPs example.

Turning on your own is a bad idea and would be deviating from a clearance.

 

[rocketflyer84]

#1 Likely the controller forgot about you. It happens.

You are supposed to ask. I think this is actually a question on the IFR written.

If you don't get a response keep flying on your heading. Check the minimum safe altitude on the chart and if you are above that and within the specified radius you are OK. I'd advise against making any unprompted turns on your own unless it's an emergency procedure to avoid terrain or another aircraft. In such a situation you are then authorized to act as necessary and inform ATC ASAP.

 

[Let'sgoflying!]

AIM 5-4-3. b. 1(b) and (c)
Radar vectors and altitude or flight
levels will be issued as required for spacing and
separating aircraft. Therefore, pilots must not deviate
from the headings issued by approach control.
Aircraft will normally be informed when it is
necessary to vector across the final approach course
for spacing or other reasons. If approach course
crossing is imminent and the pilot has not been
informed that the aircraft will be vectored across the
final approach course, the pilot should query the
controller.
(c) The pilot is not expected to turn inbound
on the final approach course unless an approach
clearance has been issued.


I have experienced both (notification of pending f.a.c. x-ing and also, no notice given)

 

[jordane93]

Turning on your own is a bad idea and would be deviating from a clearance.

 

[AggieMike88]

Thanks Dr. Dave for reminding me to RTFM (a good thing)

 

[Gucci Pilot]

1.

As others have said, I will ask about 5-10 seconds before I anticipate intercepting the localizer, "Hoist XX, still on a heading"

 

[Let'sgoflying!]

Thanks Dr. Dave for reminding me to RTFM (a good thing)

meant in a helpful, collegial way, Mike.

Dave

 

[AggieMike88]

meant in a helpful, collegial way, Mike.

Dave

And that's totally how I took it.

 

[James331]

"Approach, Cessna 123 is coming onto the localizer"

Don't turn on your own if you're not cleared

Don't keep your mouth shut and let things happen that should be happening.


It's a team effort, just tell him what's happening.


I've had it happen, it's often just a quick reply and alls well.

 

[HighFlyingA380]

To expand on this just a bit: What if you're cleared "direct FIX" on the localizer, but not explicitly to intercept it or cleared for the approach, does the same logic apply? If so, then I'm assuming I should continue through the LOC on the current heading... This seems to happen way too much 'round these parts, and I'll admit I've done all three of those actions but never truly knew what the book answer was.

 

[MAKG1]

If it's that unclear, ask.

"Please confirm intercept localizer."

 

[dtuuri]

To expand on this just a bit: What if you're cleared "direct FIX" on the localizer, but not explicitly to intercept it or cleared for the approach, does the same logic apply?

I would say not. It's common enough to get vectored across the localizer for traffic that the issue is addressed in the AIM, but allowing the pilot to navigate on his own to a fix implies traffic is not a concern, so simply rejoin the route.

dtuuri

 

[midlifeflyer]

(Post edited from original. As pointed out in the first few replies, for the situation I'm questioning, I had yet to hear the "Clear for Approach" instruction. Changes are highlighted in blue bold font. -- MF )

Based on the edited scenario, my choice is a clear #1. I'd prompt the controller while still in a position to make the turn onto the extended FAC.

#2 is a problem. You are assuming the controller being busy is the reason for the lack of the clearance. Having been in situations in which ATC has intentionally had pilots go through the localizer or given instructions to intercept without clearing for the approach (in both cases for IFR separation purposes), I know that's a bad assumption to make.

#3 is for after you have blown through the localizer because you didn't do #1 in a timely manner. Assuming terrain it isn't an an issue (you know that from your briefing, right? If it's an issue you have waited way too long) it's probably fine, but it's really both the controller and you catching up, isn't it?

 

[midlifeflyer]

They use the phrase "cleared for the approach" with the intercept instructions so I don't see how that situation would come up.

But it does. I've heard "intercept the localizer" without an approach clearance a number of times. There was even one a few years ago at your home base where the pilot descended and caused a loss of separation. He received a deviation notice and letter of investigation. I didn't represent the pilot so I don't know how it turned out.

 

[RotorDude]

To expand on this just a bit: What if you're cleared "direct FIX" on the localizer, but not explicitly to intercept it or cleared for the approach, does the same logic apply? If so, then I'm assuming I should continue through the LOC on the current heading... This seems to happen way too much 'round these parts, and I'll admit I've done all three of those actions but never truly knew what the book answer was.

If I am cleared "direct FIX" to an approach waypoint, and the freq is so congested I am unable to communicate (despite trying very hard to do so), I would turn inbound upon reaching (or into a hold there, if there is a published one), but not initially descend. Continuing on the same heading through the fix (assuming this was a "direct to" clearance, not a vector) is more of a "deviation" IMO than turning onto the approach course, since that was the (implicitly) expected goal. At some point if communication cannot be established this becomes a lost comms situation, but if it's just congestion, you need to give ATC a chance to get to you without doing something unexpected or otherwise creating a danger to yourself or others.

 

[Everskyward]

But it does. I've heard "intercept the localizer" without an approach clearance a number of times. There was even one a few years ago at your home base where the pilot descended and caused a loss of separation. He received a deviation notice and letter of investigation. I didn't represent the pilot so I don't know how it turned out.

In that situation, yes, but you don't hear "cleared for the approach" without the intercept which is what I was pointing out to the OP (Mike). Maybe what I posted was unclear or didn't cover that base.

We are frequently cleared to intercept the localizer without being "cleared for the approach", which means you do not start the descent.

 

[petrolero]

In my experience from flying and from just listening on LiveATC, the approach controllers working the ILS at KAPA almost always let the pilot know beforehand if he'll likely have to fly past final - and they often are apologetic about it. This is more often done when guys are doing VFR practice approaches but I've heard it occasionally in the soup too.

 

[airdale]

I usually say: "Approach, Bugsmasher 23Tango, request a turn"

The answer is usually the turn I want, clearance for the approach, and, often, an apology.

 

[red4golf]

The first time this happened to me was on my IFR checkride. I did #1 and they got me going on my way.

 

[BigBadLou]

#1 is the proper way to do it in this situation.
However, this situation turns into a much different situation if the controller/freq is too busy and there is no way to get a word in, thus deleting option #1.
Which has been discussed here a few times in the past. And you don't want to be asking that question here for sure.

 

[Approach_controller]

To expand on this just a bit: What if you're cleared "direct FIX" on the localizer, but not explicitly to intercept it or cleared for the approach, does the same logic apply? If so, then I'm assuming I should continue through the LOC on the current heading... This seems to happen way too much 'round these parts, and I'll admit I've done all three of those actions but never truly knew what the book answer was.

If you're cleared to a fix I'd anticipate if the freq was jammed that you wouldn't join and instead continue present heading or enter holding. If you're flying in an out daily its far easier to give you a fix you're familiar with than vector compensating for winds and keep amending. Obviously bad practice on our part to not issue an outbound heading.

 

[Approach_controller]

As to option 2, don't do it. We're supposed to tell you when to expect to go across final, true. This isn't always possible. Most of my in flight emergencies come off of departure.

Imagine we're landing 27 and you're on a 360 base leg. The A/C on left/right downwind is already going as low as I can descend. You're 30 seconds from the turn and clearance. I hear departure say something about XYZ securing an engine and need to return ASAP. I'm basing my separation on you continuing past final on that 360 heading. I'm far to busy figuring out if XYZ needs trucks and moving back A/C 3-10 in my sequence to even bother to mention you're going through the final. Now you take up option 2 and join anyway. Do I vector you into the Left or Right Downwind traffic? Or does the emergency follow you?

 

[dtuuri]

If you're cleared to a fix I'd anticipate if the freq was jammed that you wouldn't join and instead continue present heading or enter holding.

What would you expect in a real lost comm event, something different? How would you know when to differentiate between the two?

The pilot already has a clearance to the destination airport (clearance limit), most likely received prior to departure. It was interrupted by radar vectors and then re-cleared to the approach fix. No complete nor partial holding instructions were received that would indicate a possible traffic conflict. Under 91.185(c)(1) the pilot should continue his route and make an approach.

dtuuri

 

[AggieMike88]

Thanks for the answers.... curiosity well satisfied and knowledge increased.

 

[Approach_controller]

What would you expect in a real lost comm event, something different? How would you know when to differentiate between the two?

The pilot already has a clearance to the destination airport (clearance limit), most likely received prior to departure. It was interrupted by radar vectors and then re-cleared to the approach fix. No complete nor partial holding instructions were received that would indicate a possible traffic conflict. Under 91.185(c)(1) the pilot should continue his route and make an approach.

dtuuri

In an actual lost comms I'm expecting anything and everything, but I think you're trying to split hairs so finely you missed the point.

If you've gone through the final because the frequency was jammed for 30 seconds, that's probably not going to fall under the purview of lost comms. What about another scenario. Clearance told you to expect 14,000 10 minutes after departure. You've leveled at 7,000, ATC is issuing an approach clearance and you notice you departed 11 minutes ago. Do you initiate a climb?

 

[MAKG1]

If you've gone through the final because the frequency was jammed for 30 seconds, that's probably not going to fall under the purview of lost comms. What about another scenario. Clearance told you to expect 14,000 10 minutes after departure. You've leveled at 7,000, ATC is issuing an approach clearance and you notice you departed 11 minutes ago. Do you initiate a climb?

Here's another one. And it really happened.

VFR practice approach at San Jose. We contact Approach outside Class C aimed for the IAF and asking for the approach. Controller gives us a squawk code and says to expect clearance for the approach from the next controller, best forward speed as there is an inbound heavy behind. We fly to the IAF (it's still outside the Class C) at minimum, and get handed off shortly after. We switch frequencies and it's DEAD. Completely silent, no reply. It's also the normal frequency for that sector. We continue on the approach -- into Class C because that's what's expected -- and first try the other radio on the same frequency, and then go back to the previous frequency and report negative contact. They give is a different one and that one works. Then we get cleared for the approach, best forward speed.

It wasn't all that busy. We did hear the DC-10 behind us check in shortly after. But for whatever reason the normal southern approach frequency was inop.

 

[dtuuri]

If you've gone through the final because the frequency was jammed for 30 seconds, that's probably not going to fall under the purview of lost comms.

Agreed, while on a vector. After being cleared enroute (direct to FIX), it isn't the same thing anymore--you're on your own navigation to your clearance limit not ATC's.

What about another scenario. Clearance told you to expect 14,000 10 minutes after departure. You've leveled at 7,000, ATC is issuing an approach clearance and you notice you departed 11 minutes ago. Do you initiate a climb?

Very good example you pose, which I'll answer by way of a recurrent training scenario at Flight Safety International once upon a time in one of my previous lives:

After departing Stapleton westbound on a SID the CFI began a non-stop dialog with phantom aircraft for 10 minutes, preventing us from calling on frequency. Quite an impressive performance. At 10 minutes I climbed to the published lost comm altitude, whereupon he broke out in accolades for a job well done. Shucks, it was nothin'. I wasn't going to try to move the Rocky Mountains even in a sim.​

dtuuri

 

[noahfong]

Here's another one. And it really happened.

...We switch frequencies and it's DEAD. Completely silent, no reply. ...

This is really not that unusual. That's why you keep the previous frequency and be prepared to go back to it.