Expect visual...contact when on the LOC

[Kilstorm]

Got thrown a curve ball. I was told to expect the visual on the rwy I was landing on and later was instructed to call when established on the Localizer. I was a JS41 with FS2Crew and my co-pilot at the time was acting up so I was trying to handle the run away VS issue and hand fly the plane while switching freq. and finish my checks so I got a bit overloaded and reported I was on the GS instead of the LOC but also I didnt have my radios set up for an ILS since I was expecting a visual. Is that a normal thing to do to be told to expect a visual landing and then be told to call when an instrument reading is active? If so, I will stat setting my radios for the ILS even though I am flying in VFR and expecting a visual landing but at that point I really had my hands full to grab a chart to dial in a Nav when I see the field infront of me.

I'm still new at trying IFR and buy no means am trying to come off other but this is the main reason why I always request an instrument approach with a transition so I know exactly what to expect when it starts to get quick pace and busy.

[Mark Hargrove]

I don't think there is anything unusual about being asked to call 'established' on the localizer after being told to expect a visual for Rwy XX. It's really no different than being told to report when established on a VOR radial and I think it's pretty common practice for an approach controller to make such a request when it's busy.

Why wouldn't you have the localizer tuned if one is available for the runway you've been told to expect?

-M.

[Kilstorm]

On that flight where skies were clear and I was expecting a visual approach after being told to expect that, I felt it was not important to dial in the ILS since I wasnt going to use it. It just seems odd to me to use an instrument aspect on a visual action. I was flying IFR and the controller only knows what METAR is telling them so its not like they can see what I see, I get that. Just new to all this IFR and every time I feel like I am getting comfortable, I get schooled.

[RyanK]

It's a good practice to tune the ILS or load an instrument approach for guidance on a visual approach, especially at night or in unfamiliar terrain. "Expect the visual...report established on the localizer" doesn't make sense though, unless the localizer was already part of your clearance. Any chance you were on one of the TEC routes that includes a LOC, like the ones into HHR or LAX?

[rtataryn]

That seems unusual to me. The only requirement for a visual approach is to remain clear of clouds and have either the airport or the preceding aircraft in sight. There is no requirement or expectation to intercept a localizer. I used to love to sit with my handheld radio and watch the FedEx Dash 8's come into KGEG on visual approaches. They'd drop a wing and practically dive-bomb to the field at a 45 degree angle to the runway and stick it on the numbers. I guess the boxes didn't mind and they clearly had a schedule to keep. Once cleared for the visual, you can pretty much get there any way you want to.

[Keith Smith]

I've been asked the join the localizer while on visual approaches at LAX and ATL while flying single engine pistons, but I've never had it requested at smaller, quieter airports. I suspect it's used in cases where there are simultaneous visuals being conducted to parallel runways as a way of ensuring pilots remain along the extended center line without drifting into the approach path for the other runways.

I also suspect that since Part 121 ops tend to back up their visuals with the localizer, the number of instances where a pilot hasn't been prepared to join the localizer at those fields would be few and far between. I remember being caught off guard both at LAX and ATL when it happened (they were several years apart), but that's because I'm not in the habit as a Part 91 guy of dialing in the localizer when it's clear and a million. It was a learning experience about what's expected at larger fields.

[RyanK]

I remember that from Real World Coast to Coast, Keith. My reading of Kilstorm's situation is that he wasn't cleared for the visual yet, only told to expect it.

[Kilstorm]

It was an IFR flight and yes I was told to expect it and was not cleared. Since this was in at KDEN on 35L where there is a parallel and another two others on the other side of the terminal, I could see where being lined up on the LOC would lessen the work load of the controller on the radio for a visual approach in. I'll be better prepared next time but feel better reading a few post to where it could happen but its not like I was off in thinking that it was to be expected by me. Once again, I was also trying to deal with a runway VS due to FS2Crew, hand fly the plane and finish the approach and landing checklists so it was a hand full. Being also in VR where its not as easy to grab a chart at the last minute also adds to the ordeal.

[jx_]

Hey Kilstorm,

It's very common for controllers to use everything they can use to their benefit. The more congested the airspace, the more instrumentation you should be prepared to utilize to keep your track over the ground precise...and if you don't have the frequency handy, ask the controller.

Two notes:

- If you haven't been issued an approach clearance yet, then you should treat all instructions as part of your route (which makes the expected approach irrelevant).

- The word "EXPECT" means - "in case of lost comms you are expected to...."

Expect higher in ten miles means 'if you lose comms you are expected to climb to highest cleared altitude ten miles from your present position.'
Expect visual approach means 'if you lose comms you are expected to execute the visual approach.'

Fly heading XXX, intercept Runway X localizer, expect visual approach Runway X means 'your route to the airport is heading XXX to join the LOC direct to the airport, and if at anytime you lose comms, you are expected to fly the visual approach on your own.'

But always remember 'expect' does not cancel any of the FAA regulations. You are always expected to fly safely -and- at or above the Minimum IFR altitude at all times until you reach VFR conditions.

JX

[HRutila]

There is nothing wrong with being asked to tune into a localizer. In fact, at most airports where two or more parallel runways exist, this is commonplace. In Dallas, both at DFW and DAL, aircraft are routinely cleared for visual approaches and issued a speed restriction that terminates at the outer marker for the ILS approach. For example, at DAL, "Cleared visual approach Runway 13L. Maintain 170 knots until NITER."

This failure to load ILS approaches is a big problem area for general aviation pilots. When conditions become marginal, or if haze impedes a pilot's ability to see his destination airport, having the ILS ready to go eliminates the back-and-forth between the pilot and controller that results when the pilot seeks additional help finding the airport. The simplest solution is to request the ILS approach, or to at least be able to intercept the localizer until the airport can be reported in sight.