Missed approach altitude
08-12-2015 | 11:18 AM
#21
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Apr 2007
Posts: 490
Likes: 0
In order to be cleared for a visual approach, you need the airport -or- the proceeding aircraft in sight. Assume you lose sight of the proceeding aircraft and elect to go around. Climbing to 1500' AGL puts you in the clouds. Now what. You cannot execute a visual pattern.
Just throwing that out there for discussion.
Just throwing that out there for discussion.
08-12-2015 | 11:53 AM
#23
Covfefe
Joined: Jun 2015
Posts: 3,001
Likes: 0
Next time you have a fed on board ask him what he would bug on a visual. I don't think it would be an ILS missed altitude for an approach you are no longer flying when cleared for the vis. Heard of a fed who had an issue with a guy who put the published missed in. I wasnt there so I can't confirm. But the AIM is clear in my opinion.
08-12-2015 | 11:56 AM
#24
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Mar 2014
Posts: 4,153
Likes: 341
Our company has told us several times recently that if we are cleared for a visual approach, to set and plan pattern altitude (1500 AFL) for the missed approach.
However, many guys I fly with still make up their own altitude. At O'hare, it's 4,000. At a smaller airport, say Peoria for example, guys might set pattern altitude OR I've flown with guys that are cleared for the visual but still set and plan the altitude for the ILS missed approach.
It makes the most sense to me to plan the published altitude if you're on an instrument approach and to set pattern altitude if you are cleared for a visual and just plan that until the controller tells you something else to do.
Does anyone know the official correct way to do this? I've tried to look it up in multiple sources and really can't find a clear answer.
I feel like every one I fly with comes up with something different and if we were to really go missed and aren't able to contact tower right away (maybe because of radio congestion), everyone should be on the same page as to what we are doing, altitude wise.
Thanks for the input.
However, many guys I fly with still make up their own altitude. At O'hare, it's 4,000. At a smaller airport, say Peoria for example, guys might set pattern altitude OR I've flown with guys that are cleared for the visual but still set and plan the altitude for the ILS missed approach.
It makes the most sense to me to plan the published altitude if you're on an instrument approach and to set pattern altitude if you are cleared for a visual and just plan that until the controller tells you something else to do.
Does anyone know the official correct way to do this? I've tried to look it up in multiple sources and really can't find a clear answer.
I feel like every one I fly with comes up with something different and if we were to really go missed and aren't able to contact tower right away (maybe because of radio congestion), everyone should be on the same page as to what we are doing, altitude wise.
Thanks for the input.
Ultimately, there really isn't a big issue as long as you call missed early on and change the altitude.
I think this stems from the sim, where 99.9999% of approaches are made as an instrument approach of some kind where the trigger to set the missed is made and it's always the missed approach altitude being set. Negative training environment, and all.
I will say that in outstations, I have personally been cleared to make left traffic and done a visual pattern back around, so briefing the pattern altitude is still good procedure.
08-12-2015 | 12:14 PM
#25
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Jul 2013
Posts: 12,533
Likes: 1,129
08-12-2015 | 12:48 PM
#26
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Oct 2012
Posts: 140
Likes: 0
Well if your gonna fly the traffic pattern per the aim your also required to turn crosswind at TPA - 300....
Personally I don't think that's a good idea and would bet a 90 degree turn at 1200 feet could also get you in trouble.
I think setting TPA is silly, but I would tend to agree it's the lowest altitude your likely to get from the tower, so setting it maybe the safest course of action to prevent blowing through your assigned altitude.
Just because your cleared for a visual approach doesn't really have anything to do with traffic pattern altitude. And unless specifically cleared to enter the traffic pattern airline traffic in the terminal environment is rarely ever at the specific traffic pattern attitude. Nor are they flying standard traffic patterns. Typically they are cleared for long straight in approaches, or patterns that resemble left or right hand patterns, but more often then not the downwind/base legs are higher than could ever be considered a traffic pattern and would be more adequately described as an arrival flow.
Also I'm pretty sure airline pilots don't actually carry AFDs so knowing what the actual traffic pattern altitude is, is not possible.
Sure set 1500 and spin it higher when you get your clearance, but flying a traffic pattern as per the aim is not realistic, your not going to lose comms, squak 7600, and turn crosswind all before blowing through 1200ft in a jet, and if you do ATC will not be prepared for it.
I do totally agree this is an invention of schoolhouse guys who have to much time on their hands.
Personally I don't think that's a good idea and would bet a 90 degree turn at 1200 feet could also get you in trouble.
I think setting TPA is silly, but I would tend to agree it's the lowest altitude your likely to get from the tower, so setting it maybe the safest course of action to prevent blowing through your assigned altitude.
Just because your cleared for a visual approach doesn't really have anything to do with traffic pattern altitude. And unless specifically cleared to enter the traffic pattern airline traffic in the terminal environment is rarely ever at the specific traffic pattern attitude. Nor are they flying standard traffic patterns. Typically they are cleared for long straight in approaches, or patterns that resemble left or right hand patterns, but more often then not the downwind/base legs are higher than could ever be considered a traffic pattern and would be more adequately described as an arrival flow.
Also I'm pretty sure airline pilots don't actually carry AFDs so knowing what the actual traffic pattern altitude is, is not possible.
Sure set 1500 and spin it higher when you get your clearance, but flying a traffic pattern as per the aim is not realistic, your not going to lose comms, squak 7600, and turn crosswind all before blowing through 1200ft in a jet, and if you do ATC will not be prepared for it.
I do totally agree this is an invention of schoolhouse guys who have to much time on their hands.
08-12-2015 | 01:06 PM
#27
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Mar 2014
Posts: 4,153
Likes: 341
Well if your gonna fly the traffic pattern per the aim your also required to turn crosswind at TPA - 300....
Personally I don't think that's a good idea and would bet a 90 degree turn at 1200 feet could also get you in trouble.
I think setting TPA is silly, but I would tend to agree it's the lowest altitude your likely to get from the tower, so setting it maybe the safest course of action to prevent blowing through your assigned altitude.
Just because your cleared for a visual approach doesn't really have anything to do with traffic pattern altitude. And unless specifically cleared to enter the traffic pattern airline traffic in the terminal environment is rarely ever at the specific traffic pattern attitude. Nor are they flying standard traffic patterns. Typically they are cleared for long straight in approaches, or patterns that resemble left or right hand patterns, but more often then not the downwind/base legs are higher than could ever be considered a traffic pattern and would be more adequately described as an arrival flow.
Also I'm pretty sure airline pilots don't actually carry AFDs so knowing what the actual traffic pattern altitude is, is not possible.
Sure set 1500 and spin it higher when you get your clearance, but flying a traffic pattern as per the aim is not realistic, your not going to lose comms, squak 7600, and turn crosswind all before blowing through 1200ft in a jet, and if you do ATC will not be prepared for it.
I do totally agree this is an invention of schoolhouse guys who have to much time on their hands.
Personally I don't think that's a good idea and would bet a 90 degree turn at 1200 feet could also get you in trouble.
I think setting TPA is silly, but I would tend to agree it's the lowest altitude your likely to get from the tower, so setting it maybe the safest course of action to prevent blowing through your assigned altitude.
Just because your cleared for a visual approach doesn't really have anything to do with traffic pattern altitude. And unless specifically cleared to enter the traffic pattern airline traffic in the terminal environment is rarely ever at the specific traffic pattern attitude. Nor are they flying standard traffic patterns. Typically they are cleared for long straight in approaches, or patterns that resemble left or right hand patterns, but more often then not the downwind/base legs are higher than could ever be considered a traffic pattern and would be more adequately described as an arrival flow.
Also I'm pretty sure airline pilots don't actually carry AFDs so knowing what the actual traffic pattern altitude is, is not possible.
Sure set 1500 and spin it higher when you get your clearance, but flying a traffic pattern as per the aim is not realistic, your not going to lose comms, squak 7600, and turn crosswind all before blowing through 1200ft in a jet, and if you do ATC will not be prepared for it.
I do totally agree this is an invention of schoolhouse guys who have to much time on their hands.
For the lazy it states traffic pattern altitude is at least 1,500 AGL.
FWIW, uncontrolled fields have no such restriction.
08-12-2015 | 01:12 PM
#28
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Jul 2013
Posts: 12,533
Likes: 1,129
No need for an A/FD. 91.129(e) applies (assuming class D, which is where we operate most of the time at outstations where this discussion is even applicable).
For the lazy it states traffic pattern altitude is at least 1,500 AGL.
FWIW, uncontrolled fields have no such restriction.
For the lazy it states traffic pattern altitude is at least 1,500 AGL.
FWIW, uncontrolled fields have no such restriction.
The traffic pattern is at 1500 unless otherwise stated in the AFD. There are class D airports that sit under class C shelves and only have 1200 foot ceilings. TPA at those places are 1000 for all aircraft. This isn't a one size fits all scenario.
08-12-2015 | 01:15 PM
#29
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Mar 2014
Posts: 4,153
Likes: 341
Most of the time? I'd say a traditional regional airline pilot operates at a Class D airport less than 40% of the time. Typically you'll be operating at B/C airports at least 50% of the time.
The traffic pattern is at 1500 unless otherwise stated in the AFD. There are class D airports that sit under class C shelves and only have 1200 foot ceilings. TPA at those places are 1000 for all aircraft. This isn't a one size fits all scenario.
The traffic pattern is at 1500 unless otherwise stated in the AFD. There are class D airports that sit under class C shelves and only have 1200 foot ceilings. TPA at those places are 1000 for all aircraft. This isn't a one size fits all scenario.
08-12-2015 | 01:27 PM
#30
Thread Starter
Line Holder
Joined: Aug 2014
Posts: 43
Likes: 0
Thanks for the discussion guys. Really great ideas. Except Beechnut...your response made you seem unintelligent and I quickly lost respect for your answer due to your lack of tact.
I ask the question because it seems like every other guy I fly with corrects me in my briefing, saying that side A is correct. So I'll change my brief on the next guy to see what happens and sure enough, he thinks side B is correct.
Now I want to know which side is actually correct and I can't find it anywhere in the FARs. Although we have heard from our company what they want us to do...that seems a bit strange to me because I would think it should be consistent with every airline so the controllers know what you're doing in the event that you can't get a hold of them right away.
I've also heard the argument that because you are still squaking an IFR code and not 1200...that even if you're cleared for the visual you still fly the ILS missed.
Anyways, seems like we are all a bit split on the answer still. If anyone comes across any official language somewhere I would love to see it.
Thanks again.
I ask the question because it seems like every other guy I fly with corrects me in my briefing, saying that side A is correct. So I'll change my brief on the next guy to see what happens and sure enough, he thinks side B is correct.
Now I want to know which side is actually correct and I can't find it anywhere in the FARs. Although we have heard from our company what they want us to do...that seems a bit strange to me because I would think it should be consistent with every airline so the controllers know what you're doing in the event that you can't get a hold of them right away.
I've also heard the argument that because you are still squaking an IFR code and not 1200...that even if you're cleared for the visual you still fly the ILS missed.
Anyways, seems like we are all a bit split on the answer still. If anyone comes across any official language somewhere I would love to see it.
Thanks again.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
