Visual/contact clearance in IMC/IFR cond's

[Jonathan_tcu]

I'm looking for some kind of clarification here.  An aircraft last night, was cleared for the approach, I think before the regular 20 nm call.  Our weather for the past days has been IFR to MVFR.  Why would a controller issue a visual or contact approach "IF THE CONDITIONS WARRANT" ? The pilot was flying IMC for the approach.  When he was handed off from center to FSS, he requested a backcourse 21 and circle for VOR/DME 28 (full procedure) due to a 700 ft overcast ceiling and strong 25 kt winds from the west.  Shouldn't the controller have asked which approach he wanted prior to the hand off?

[msk1172]

I'm not sure if I fully understand your question.  You could not (as a controller) issue a visual, or contact approach clearance if the aircraft is IMC or the field is declared IFR, so I'm not totally sure what your talking about, especially when you say he made his request for the approach after being handed off to FSS?  I can't think of any situation where the controller would tell you to contact FSS.   If flying into an uncontrolled field, the controller would send you over to CTAF/UNICOM, and once you were on the ground you would switch over to FSS and cancel IFR (or wait until your out of the plane and call on a landline/cellphone).  Perhaps you could provide additional information to help clarify your question.


Mike

[Jonathan_tcu]

Sure can.  Where I live, we're non-radar from 10 000 ft ASL.  Aircrafts must call the field in site before ATC clears them for the final approach to the aerodome, or they must request the contact or any published approach with ATC and excecute that approach with the FSS.  Some controllers, give a 'provisional clearance', meaning the controllers are no longer permitted to give a 'visual' clearance' to aircrafts who don't physically see the field in a non-radar environment.  With that said, some controllers STILL do for our airport.  But last night, the ceiling was  no more than 800 to 1000 feet overcast and that pilot was given a 'provisional visual or contact' approach.  When the pilot called the FSS to announce his intentions, the FSS personel approved the full procedure, backcourse 21 and circle for 28.  Some controllers would have had the pilot proceed direct the BUDAR (IF for BC rwy 21), once at BUDAR, hand off to 122.3 and continue from there.

[davolijj]

Do FSS personnel work as controllers at certain airports in Canada?  I'm a little unclear as to why an aircraft on approach to an airport would talk to Flight Service people unless he was receiving DF guidance or a weather briefing.

[Jonathan_tcu]

These guys are flight service airport advisory personel, that's the description for FSS (Flight service station).  Their job is to advise of traffic and preferred procedures within the 6 nm radius of the aerodome.  If the pilot enters the 'control zone', they're given the advisory and the pilot makes the final decision.  There is our city CYTS and where I used to live CYYB.  Most other smaller cities with capable radio communication, like Kapuskasking (CYYU) and Earlton (CYXR) are manned via RCO to London radio CYXU.

[davolijj]

Interesting....anyway, to answer your original question:  My guess is that the pilot was not fully aware of the weather conditions before he chaged to the FSS frequency.  Therefore, he was probably not sure of which approach to request.

Also, regarding the contact approach.  The pilot CAN be cleared for a contact approach even if the field is IFR.  All he needs is 1 mile visibility, clearance from clouds, and reasonable assurance that he can continue to the airport under those conditions.

[Jonathan_tcu]

Perfect.  The contact approach makes sense, because the vis was 2 miles at the time with just gusty winds.  Should a contact approach occur in wide open VFR weather in non-radar, does that mean the pilot must maintain an altitude of 1000 ft AGL or greater above the highest obstacle or terrain before 5 nm final to the approach?

Otherwise, your answer makes sense.  ATC always re assures the pilots of the current conditions and the ATIS and always hotlines the FSS for possible traffic updates to cover themselves during the approach clearance.

[binky]

Sounds like the controller had issued a non-specific approach clearance which is legal "cleared to the Timmins airport for an approach" and allows the pilot to choose any IFR approach they choose to fly.  He can then can add on "visual approach approved if you get the field" if the weather at the airport would make it legal as you mentioned (a provisional clearance).  The approach clearance can be issued miles and miles away if the controller chooses to do so unless there is some type of local procedure in place that say it should not be done (the '20 mile' call?).  There would have been no planned IFR outbounds and no other inbound IFR traffic around at that time.  Something to clarify is that a contact approach cannot be solicited by the controller by saying "contact approach will be approved" or "would you like the contact?".  It doesnt mean that it happens that way in practice especially in a non-radar environment where a full procedure approach takes a lot of time. I must say that I dont fully understand the scenario you describe.  The aircraft is inbound for the BC21 then wants to circle, then do a full procedure approach on 28 to land?  Do you mean that they wanted to do the BC21 then circle to land on 28?  If the ceiling of 800 feet would allow this to be done with a landing on 28 once they broke out under the cloud deck.  Unless they wanted another practice approach after the BC21 they would have simply landed on 28.

[Jonathan_tcu]

The procedure at the aerodome here is if you're approaching from the north, with strong west winds varying frm 280 to 330 or beyond that, with a low ceiling, most pilots will request the BC 21, then circle left (counter-clockwise) as the full procedure turn to land on 28.  The IFR approach plate suggests BUDAR (the IF for bc21) then circle and I would assume interecept an arc for the circling for 28.  If the winds were calmer, less than 10 kt, then the pilots would land straight-in bc 21 full stop via BUDAR fix.  

With regards to the given approach, I would have assumed ATC knew the actual field conditions and always hotlines the FSS to get actual conditions, but perhaps she didn't.  

What I've noticed is not all controllers follow the same rule.  You'll hear some guys asking the pilots to report 20 nm (point of dropping off radar), hotline the FSS, co-ordinate the approach, whether or not there is traffic) and then hand-off once the pilot intercepts the loc.  Other controllers will clear the pilot anywhere between 30 and 40 nm out before intercepting the loc for the bc.   If this is confusing, I agree.  

[binky]

I am still missing something.  If a plane flies inbound on 21 with the intention to land on a runway other than 21 they will be cleared for the BC21, circling to another runway approach with the understanding that they will breaking the approach off on 21 and landing visually on another runway.  IN your scenario this permits the pilot to fly direct to the IF, do a straight in approach to 21, get visual with the field and then manoevre to land on 28 into wind.  If they fully intended on flying inbound on 28 and landing 28, flying the approach on 21 only to have to conduct a missed approach then do a full procedure approach on 28 afterwards is a complete waste of time.  If inbound from the northwest the easiest way to get in on 28 would be to overfly the Timmins VOR then fly the full procedure approach to 28.  It sounds to me you are confusing a LOC/BC 21 circling to runway 28 approach with something else.  You dont fly a BC21 then do a procedure turn to do the approach on 28.

[Lexxx]

Binky.

I think he used the term "procedure turn" in an earlier post when he really meant "circling to the left" for the landing. It confused me too.

I'm guessing with northwest winds (for whatever reason) they do the backcourse 21, go down to minimums knowing they'll get the field with the reported ceiling, break off the approch to runway 21, "circle" to the left, come in on a right base and land 28.

If you're coming from the north, the instument approach to 21 will be closer than going further south to get to the approach to 28.

That's all I can think of.

[Jonathan_tcu]

Ok, here's the clarification.  The procedure turn is quite common.  It's just when pilots, in conditions where the winds are greater than 10 knots, approaching from the north, say frm Moosonee (CYMO)  or Kapuskasing (CYYU) or even Cochrane and Iroquois Falls, will fly to the BUDAR fix, and intercept the BC21 approach, to get a southbound loc approach and the request the 'full procedure' or 'procedure turn' with ATC prior to handing off to the FSS.  So, you approach from the north, get the BC 21, then circle left toward the AVTOD fix and then intercept the VOR/DME rwy 28 via the AVTOD.  It's like a bowtie type of flight pattern.  Sometimes, pilots will request the BC 21, fly to the Sandy Falls ZTS, and then turn around in a 180 to land with the ILD on 03 via the Sandy Falls.  The point is the pilots want to get the ILS and then take time to land against the west wind on 28.  Plus, the procedure turn is used often, should the ILS become u/s for any reason.  Or, pilots will diver to another airport.