What’s a graceful way of asking for a different approach?

MauleSkinner said:
If the reason you’re not canceling when entering the pattern with other airplanes is so SAR is available, it seems to be a logical conclusion.
Click to expand...
There are often all sorts of things you can rely on to some degree, including people who are expecting you. But ultimately I think it's about the quick initiation of the SAR process when you neither cancel nor report missed.

The Opposing Bases comment was only that you can't rely on ATC any more. That's just as true with canceling flight following as it is canceling IFR.
 
Of course, even if you leave your IFR plan engaged, there's no guarantee. There's no automated check to see if you closed the plan. It's on the controller to remember that you neither closed nor came back up on the missed. There was a crash a few decades ago (Connecticut?) where the pilot told the controller when he did the "contact advisory" that he'd probably be talking to him on the missed. The only problem is the guy crashed and the controller forgot about him.
 
flyingron said:
Of course, even if you leave your IFR plan engaged, there's no guarantee. There's no automated check to see if you closed the plan. It's on the controller to remember that you neither closed nor came back up on the missed. There was a crash a few decades ago (Connecticut?) where the pilot told the controller when he did the "contact advisory" that he'd probably be talking to him on the missed. The only problem is the guy crashed and the controller forgot about him.
Click to expand...
This is the one I remember, see par 1.17.1: https://www.ntsb.gov/investigations/AccidentReports/Reports/AAR7607.pdf

I was on a trip through Greater Pittsburgh that day, September 12, 1975, and the girls behind the desk at Beckett Aviation were all shook up because the plane never reached the destination and people were calling them wondering if the plane had departed yet. They had just been talking with the crew and watched it depart. At the time, nobody knew where it was and they were emotionally affected. I recall them asking how long of a flight it should have been. I'd like to think SAR procedures have been tightened since then.
 
Last edited:
MauleSkinner said:
If the reason you’re not canceling when entering the pattern with other airplanes is so SAR is available, it seems to be a logical conclusion.
Click to expand...
It does seem like false comfort, to rely on other airplanes for SAR , not all crashes result in smoke, or something noticeable from an unsuspecting airplane flying overhead.
 
Salty said:
Let’s say you get cleared for an approach to get below the deck at an untowered airport, but it’s to the downwind runway or there’s a bunch of vfr traffic in the pattern going the other way. The most simple way is to just cancel ifr once you get below the clouds, but what if you want to keep your clearance until you land? You’re cleared for rnav 18 and you break out and want the visual 36. I could clumsily get my request across, but I can’t think of a clear, concise way of doing it.
Click to expand...
You are cleared RNAV 18 at an uncontrolled airport and using a standard instrument procedure, which includes circle to land to another runway when published. No additional clearance required and you may cancel in the air or on the surface.
 
Problem I see with the question is that by the time you realize you want to circle due to traffic you have already been cleared for the approach AND have switched frequency to the local CTAF. You don’t have to cancel until you get on the ground though. Wouldn’t recommend you do a couple laps in the pattern though. I find it to be helpful to cancel as soon as practicable. Delaying canceling in severe clear is a great way, FOR ME, to forget to cancel. After two lovely conversations with the FSDO I hope I have learned!.
 
midlifeflyer said:
There are often all sorts of things you can rely on to some degree, including people who are expecting you. But ultimately I think it's about the quick initiation of the SAR process when you neither cancel nor report missed.

The Opposing Bases comment was only that you can't rely on ATC any more. That's just as true with canceling flight following as it is canceling IFR.
Click to expand...
"...can't rely on ATC any more..." implies there used to be a time. I doubt if on the whole it's much more or less so than years ago. It, like everything else is not 100% foolproof. First instance that came to my mind was from Medford, OR, late 70's. Center gives the Tower an inbound on I think it was a Convair. The Tower dude forgot that the plane was coming. At closing time he just went home. The plane was discovered the next the morning by the Sheriff or Highway Patrol, don't remember which. If I remember right, it was determined that the crash was not survivable at impact, so there is that. Caused a big stink in the FAA. He was there alone but there were a couple of other Controllers signed in on duty. That was not all uncommon back then. It was called an 'early shove.' Go home now but sign out using a later time.
 
Maybe I'm missing something. But they ask you what your intentions are at completion of the approach. If you're a full stop, once they clear you for the approach to a non-towered airport, I don't think they care, unless you go missed. I'd think that if you don't cancel in the air, you could just simply break out into VFR, join the downwind at 1,000' agl, then close your flight plan on the ground by phone and they'd be none the wiser, right?

Likewise, if you break out above minimums, but below vfr, and are shooting the published circle-to-land, I'd think you just do it.
 
Last edited:
wilkersk said:
Maybe I'm missing something. But they ask you what your intentions are at completion of the approach. If you're a full stop, once they clear you for the approach to a non-towered airport, I don't think they care, unless you go missed. I'd think that if you don't cancel in the air, you could just simply break out into VFR, join the downwind at 1,000' agl, then close your flight plan on the ground by phone and they'd be none the wiser, right?

Likewise, if you break out above minimums, but below vfr, and are shooting the published circle-to-land, I'd think you just do it.
Click to expand...
They don’t always ask what your intentions are. If you’re doing a practice approach, then yeah, it’s nice to know ahead of time.
 
benyflyguy said:
Problem I see with the question is that by the time you realize you want to circle due to traffic you have already been cleared for the approach AND have switched frequency to the local CTAF.
Click to expand...
That’s why I always monitored the CTAF early.
 
luvflyin said:
They don’t always ask what your intentions are. If you’re doing a practice approach, then yeah, it’s nice to know ahead of time.
Click to expand...
If they clear you for the approach without asking, would that change anything? You're still cleared for the approach. Once you've broken out at or above minimums and acquired the landing environment, you're either gonna land and close your flight plan, or go missed and contact approach. The controller's likes and dislikes don't count at that point. Am I right?
 
wilkersk said:
If they clear you for the approach without asking, would that change anything? You're still cleared for the approach. Once you've broken out at or above minimums and acquired the landing environment, you're either gonna land and close your flight plan, or go missed and contact approach. The controller's likes and dislikes don't count at that point. Am I right?
Click to expand...
I think the controller likes (demands?) that you follow the heavy black line on your approach chart unless you cancel or receive a revised clearance (contact? visual?).
 
wilkersk said:
If they clear you for the approach without asking, would that change anything? You're still cleared for the approach. Once you've broken out at or above minimums and acquired the landing environment, you're either gonna land and close your flight plan, or go missed and contact approach. The controller's likes and dislikes don't count at that point. Am I right?
Click to expand...

Knowing what your intentions are can help them plan things. Like deciding an EFC to give to the next guy waiting for an Approach or how much to vector him around. Or what delay to tell a departure waiting to go to expect. But regardless of your intentions, they have to protect the Missed Approach even if you intend land. You could throw the gear knob down at the FAF and get an unsafe gear indication and you can't troubleshoot it that late in the game. You could break out and there is a plane or something else on the runway that prevents you from landing. In both those examples the weather is such that you can't cancel and deal with it underneath. I can't speak for every Controller, but I doubt if most ask the intentions of regular customers who are always itenerant and plan to land. And probably do on call signs they recognize as regular practice Approach customers. Many of those will usually just spit it out when first requesting an Approach.
 
wilkersk said:
If they clear you for the approach without asking, would that change anything? You're still cleared for the approach. Once you've broken out at or above minimums and acquired the landing environment, you're either gonna land and close your flight plan, or go missed and contact approach. The controller's likes and dislikes don't count at that point. Am I right?
Click to expand...
You are right from a regulatory standpoint but perhaps not so much from a good IFR system participant one. I'm not just talking about ATC. There's also that guy next in line for the approach holding until you cancel. And maybe even someone at another holding for release until you clear the airspace.

First Commandment of IFR flying: Thou shalt always be on the same page as ATC.
Second Commandment of IFR Flying: It's not all about you.
 
Obviously, it would be good to make your intentions known both to ATC and on CTAF, to fly the approach to within a reasonable distance before breaking it off to join the VFR pattern, and if not landing full-stop to instead execute the published missed approach.

My whole point was that once you're cleared for the approach and intend to land full-stop, I don't think you need special permission from ATC to join downwind for the already in progress VFR pattern to the opposite runway. Flying a publish circling approach with VFR aircraft in the pattern would be problematic and unnecessary.
 
midlifeflyer said:
You are right from a regulatory standpoint but perhaps not so much from a good IFR system participant one. I'm not just talking about ATC. There's also that guy next in line for the approach holding until you cancel. And maybe even someone at another holding for release until you clear the airspace.

First Commandment of IFR flying: Thou shalt always be on the same page as ATC.
Second Commandment of IFR Flying: It's not all about you.
Click to expand...

Prior to Hilton Head getting its tower it was that bad with IFR cancelations. It was busy enough most days that if aircraft didn’t cancel in an expeditious manner (field in sight) it would create a traffic jam of IFR arrivals and departures. Doesn’t hurt the controller. Takes a few seconds to issue a hold but the aircraft holding in the air and the ones waiting on the ground suffer. I’m sure there are some other busy non towered fields around the country that have the same problem.

I can understand if someone is landing at a remote airport with no traffic and not wanting to cancel in the air. But at a busy airport and populated area, chances are someone will see or hear an aircraft go down. I’d be willing to bet an even faster response than the ALNOT that is sent of from ATC for a non cancelation (30 minutes).
 
Angel flight wants you on an IFR plan, my interpretation is from start to finish. That would be one operational reason to not cancel. Most of the time, I cancel if it is vfr conditions, but if it's still IMC, I'll cancel on the ground, even if there is "vfr" traffic flying.
 
wilkersk said:
My whole point was that once you're cleared for the approach and intend to land full-stop, I don't think you need special permission from ATC to join downwind for the already in progress VFR pattern to the opposite runway
Click to expand...
That is correct.
 
wilkersk said:
My whole point was that once you're cleared for the approach and intend to land full-stop, I don't think you need special permission from ATC to join downwind for the already in progress VFR pattern to the opposite runway.
Click to expand...
You don't need special permission after the FAF. Before that, like say on base leg of a TAA, you can't make a "direct to downwind" track without canceling or asking for a visual/contact approach. See: 5-4-7 below. That might seem obvious to an experienced pilot, but some here aren't all that experienced :):

i. Except when being radar vectored to the final approach course, when cleared for a specifically prescribed IAP; i.e., “cleared ILS runway one niner approach” or when “cleared approach” i.e., execution of any procedure prescribed for the airport, pilots must execute the entire procedure commencing at an IAF or an associated feeder route as described on the IAP chart unless an appropriate new or revised ATC clearance is received, or the IFR flight plan is canceled.​
 
What I don't get, is the expectation that continuing your IFR flight plan to the ground gives you ANY protection from the VFR guys using the field. there is only obligation on the ATO's part to separate you from other IFR traffic. Once you are in VMC it's see and avoid the VFR guys.

I'd rather tell him, I'm cancelling if I may remain on the freq for advisories, and then monitor UNICOM more loudly than App con. AppCon can't hurt you then but a VFR guy who is not careful, sure can.

The exception of course is the Balto Wash "temporary" zone and anyplace where "huntress" is active. Of course then there will be very few VFRs.
 
Pick up the one minute weather, figure out the runway you want, then ask for direct to the appropriate IAF from approach. You are the pilot in command, not ATC.
 
bbchien said:
What I don't get, is the expectation that continuing your IFR flight plan to the ground gives you ANY protection from the VFR guys using the field. there is only obligation on the ATO's part to separate you from other IFR traffic. Once you are in VMC it's see and avoid the VFR guys.

I'd rather tell him, I'm cancelling if I may remain on the freq for advisories, and then monitor UNICOM more loudly than App con. AppCon can't hurt you then but a VFR guy who is not careful, sure can.

The exception of course is the Balto Wash "temporary" zone and anyplace where "huntress" is active. Of course then there will be very few VFRs.
Click to expand...
Who claimed that ifr gives you protection from vfr guys using the field? That is not any argument I’ve seen on this thread.
 
Steamflyer said:
Pick up the one minute weather, figure out the runway you want, then ask for direct to the appropriate IAF from approach. You are the pilot in command, not ATC.
Click to expand...
true. Misses the point, but true.
 
I seem to remember that ATC works for me... that is I am the customer. But I must caution that this is not a situation where the customer is always right..!!!!:p:D:D:)

Flying into KEMT two weeks back they gave us the VOR-A... came back and asked for the RNAV (GPS) B as we were right on the airway that feeds that approach..

No problems...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top