PilotEdge Forums

Pilots,

Finished 2014 with a bang, knocking out I-6 and I-7. Failed I-6 the first time around because I somehow and inexplicably misread the SLI DME outbound on R-049 and moved SAGER 5 miles west of it's actual location. Couldn't figure out why the Localizer was not moving in despite a 30degree intercept...Fail. Could have cross referenced with another VOR but too much work singlehanded with the Carenado C90's awkward to tune radios...Of course I could also have cheated with the GPS. Never!

Anyway, flush with victory over I-6 and with about 45 min before PE shut down for New Years, I decided to fly off into the sunset KSNA - KAVX on I-7.

My plan (blue) was to proceed to the VOR, turn north (right) and intercept RIGLI (IAF) outbound, descend, LT procedure turn, return to RIGLI, circle to land. (So, um, like shoot the approach..so what you ask?)

http://peaware.pilotedge.net/flight.cfm?id=81376

First wrinkle came with ATC somewhat surprisingly assigned me a vector to FAC about 15-20 miles out.."Ummm, roger." followed by, "Control, be advised we intend to fly the whole approach"...

So now the NEW plan (red) is to fly to RIGLI turn RT (seems I could turn any which was I choose) to intercept outbound course (probably would have been better to go the extra 5 miles to the VOR but that's the plan I came up with). Turned north intercepted outbound crs for a min or so. Did LT procedure turn, Intercepted FAC. At or about RIGLI turned 45 LEFT to enter a RIGHT base for 22 while announcing on CTAF. Which shockingly got no response despite 2 or 3 planes in the vicinity of KAVX or having just departed to the SE... Peformed one of my trademark poor kingair landings and contacted approach...

He initially intended to fail me for "deviating east of the Final Approach Course"...I was a little stunned and argued my case that I entered a Right Base for traffic (which as an IFR flight Squawking 1200) was certainly in my power to do. He said, "Oh, OK, that makes sense to me now - pass". Yippee. But I don't think I needed "traffic" to justify my left turn to base at any point before the MAFPI...

So, after the long preamble - How would you guys have flown this approach in this circumstance? Note -- Circling SE of the field is prohibited in the note. KAVX has RIGHT traffic for 22. Field is landing 22 (per watching the pattern).

1. Option 1 - As described, you're a flying legend, Todd [Left 45 to RT ~4 mile base leg, to final 22] [Red Dash]
2. Option 2 - Proceed to MAFPI then overfly field on upwind, then RT downwind, etc. [This seems very reasonable to me in retrospect, but after burning all the gas inbound and outbound and inbound it never really occured to me to choose it over option 1
3.Option 3 - Turn right 270 at MAFPI, enter right base 22. [Seems really bad to me - flying against the traffic pattern, hard to see traffic, and a lot of monkey motion right at the critical point of the approach and relatively low to boot.
4. Option 4 - Cancel IFR 10 miles out field in sight. Announce Straight in to 22. [Sure, ok-ish in real world, but almost certainly = I-7 Fail]

Some more questions:
1.a. Am I correct that on this circling approach I can legally choose to "circle" at any point once inbound on the FAC? Or at a minimum at RIGLI (which is what I did, but I don't think I had to hit RIGLI, say if I was to be base #2 behind the Piper Cub or even without traffic).

1.b. With NO tower it seems you can circle however you want...HYPOTHETICAL: What if circling WAS allowed to the SE and 22 had LEFT traffic as is more usual - how would you have circled??

1.c Ok, now what about In IMC say at Mins? Overfly midfield at 2220 (600AGL) just under the clouds, enter left downwind, base, 22?Or say, Circle "early" to set up a LEFT base, hard right turn to LT base, 22? The clouds are closing in...

2. I assumed (MAFPI) was just an intersection name for the Missed Approach, and wasn't sure why it was in parentheses. I realize now it is a functional name ala (FAF). What is it? Missed Approach something something? Why not MAF? or MAP? Private Investigator?

3. Closing IFR on the ground at uncontrolled field...Ok so I've never done this before. My thought was that I would CALL on the phone (not sure what # SOCAL APP if listed in the chart, worst case 800WXBRIEF! or even KSNA tower). The proper thing is to call APP on the radio I guess. But what if you can't reach them on the ground? I got scolded a bit for initially trying a pseudo phone call back on KSNA Clearance 118.0. Properly chastened I called on APP CTRL 127.2

4. WOW. Just noticed the Missed Approach is to a NON-Standard LEFT Hand holding pattern. Would have been nice if they called attention to tht in the plate! Ugh. I think that would be a RIGHT turn to Parallel Entry. Glad I didn't have to go Missed!

Thanks for the feedback, who knew all the questions that could arise from a simple non-precision approach!

Todd

Talan2000 wrote: First wrinkle came with ATC somewhat surprisingly assigned me a vector to FAC about 15-20 miles out.."Ummm, roger." followed by, "Control, be advised we intend to fly the whole approach"...

If inbound from the NE on this approach, a vector is required.

• 7110.65U Air Traffic Control
  
  4-8-1 Approach Clearance Procedures
  
  e. For both RNAV and conventional approaches, intercept angles greater than 90 degrees may be used when a procedure turn, a hold­in­lieu of procedure turn pattern, or arrival holding is depicted and the pilot will execute the procedure.

This is not the case with the VOR/DME OR GPS-B approach at AVX.

ATC cannot legally clear you for this approach when you're direct RIGLI or SXC from the NE or NW because there is no way to legally reverse course at SXC or at RIGLI from those directions. Both your red and blue courses depicted above represent illegal ways of completing this approach, since the area south of RIGLI -- with the exception of the final approach segment there -- is unprotected airspace. The solution when radar is out of service is to fly the VOR or GPS-A approach, which has a hold in lieu of a procedure turn at SXC to facilitate course reversals from any direction.

The course reversal that is published at RIGLI does not protect you from any obstacles inside (aka the side towards the airport) of RIGLI; rather, it protects you within 10nm of RIGLI on the north/northwest side of the final approach course. Therefore, to make this work, you can only be cleared to start the approach from RIGLI while on a course that permits you to intercept the final approach course with a less-than-90-degree turn. Such a turn allows you to track the final approach course outbound from RIGLI without entering the unprotected airspace inside of RIGLI.

Talan2000 wrote: So now the NEW plan...At or about RIGLI turned 45 LEFT to enter a RIGHT base for 22 while announcing on CTAF.

He initially intended to fail me for "deviating east of the Final Approach Course"...I was a little stunned and argued my case that I entered a Right Base for traffic (which as an IFR flight Squawking 1200) was certainly in my power to do. He said, "Oh, OK, that makes sense to me now - pass". Yippee. But I don't think I needed "traffic" to justify my left turn to base at any point before the MAFPI...

So, after the long preamble - How would you guys have flown this approach in this circumstance? Note -- Circling SE of the field is prohibited in the note. KAVX has RIGHT traffic for 22. Field is landing 22 (per watching the pattern).

When it comes to circling, your priority -- after getting the airport in sight before the missed approach point -- is to get the aircraft within legal circling distances from the end of a runway before you start circling/maneuvering around. This may occur before the published missed approach point. (If it happens right at the missed approach point, you'll already be within the legal circling distances from the runway.) See page 4-9 of the Instrument Procedures Handbook for more details.

The distance required is dependent upon your approach category. Approach categories are defined by your indicated airspeed as you conduct an approach.

• CAT A = Vapp < 91 KIAS
• CAT B = Vapp 91 - 121 KIAS

Category A aircraft must remain within 1.3nm of any runway end. Category B aircraft, 1.5nm. Aircraft approach categories may change, as this is entirely dependent on its approach speed.

Talan2000 wrote: 1.a. Am I correct that on this circling approach I can legally choose to "circle" at any point once inbound on the FAC? Or at a minimum at RIGLI (which is what I did, but I don't think I had to hit RIGLI, say if I was to be base #2 behind the Piper Cub or even without traffic).

No. The circling maneuver may only begin when you're within the legal circling radius from the airport's runway ends. Continue along the final approach course until you meet that requirement.

Talan2000 wrote: 1.b. With NO tower it seems you can circle however you want...HYPOTHETICAL: What if circling WAS allowed to the SE and 22 had LEFT traffic as is more usual - how would you have circled??

Turns at non-towered airports must be made to the left according to 14 CFR 91.126.

Talan2000 wrote: 1.c Ok, now what about In IMC say at Mins? Overfly midfield at 2220 (600AGL) just under the clouds, enter left downwind, base, 22?Or say, Circle "early" to set up a LEFT base, hard right turn to LT base, 22? The clouds are closing in...

You don't worry about following a standard traffic pattern if you're at circling mins on a circling approach. You just go for the numbers and get it on the ground.

Talan2000 wrote:2. I assumed (MAFPI) was just an intersection name for the Missed Approach, and wasn't sure why it was in parentheses. I realize now it is a functional name ala (FAF). What is it? Missed Approach something something? Why not MAF? or MAP? Private Investigator?

Prior to RNAV/GPS, these functional names didn't exist. This approach was likely the VOR/DME-B before they approved it to be flown with GPS, hence the VOR/DME OR GPS-B title it currently holds. The missed approach fix (MAF) on this approach is the SXC 2.8 DME. To make this easier for RNAV/GPS equipment to process, they started using these functional names so that the GPS knows when to queue the pilot for the missed approach. It's easier for the unit to display and reference MAFPI than SXC 2.8 DME. ATC does not usually ever refer to these functional names.

Talan2000 wrote: 3. Closing IFR on the ground at uncontrolled field...Ok so I've never done this before. My thought was that I would CALL on the phone (not sure what # SOCAL APP if listed in the chart, worst case 800WXBRIEF! or even KSNA tower). The proper thing is to call APP on the radio I guess. But what if you can't reach them on the ground? I got scolded a bit for initially trying a pseudo phone call back on KSNA Clearance 118.0. Properly chastened I called on APP CTRL 127.2

The controller should advise which frequency to use. If the controller knows who you are, they may not feel it necessary to reiterate these instructions. Sometimes it is omitted purely on error. If there's any question, just ask prior to leaving the ATC frequency.

• 7110.65U Air Traffic Control
  4-2-10. CANCELLATION OF IFR FLIGHT PLAN
  
  a. If necessary, before instructing an IFR aircraft arriving at an airport not served by an air traffic control tower or flight service station to change to the common traffic advisory frequency, provide the pilot with instructions on how to cancel his/her IFR flight plan.
  
  1. Airports with an air/ground communications station:
  
  PHRASEOLOGY­
  (Call sign) REPORT CANCELLATION OF IFR ON (frequency).
  
  2. Airports without an air/ground communications station:
  
  PHRASEOLOGY­
  (Call sign) REPORT CANCELLATION OF IFR THIS FREQUENCY OR WITH FLIGHT SERVICE.
  or
  (Aircraft call sign) REPORT CANCELLATION OF IFR THIS FREQUENCY OR WITH (FSS serving the area or the ATC controlling facility).
  
  
  EXAMPLE­
  “N13WA report cancellation of IFR this frequency or with McAlester Radio.”

In the real world there are several ways to cancel a flight plan. Some of them can be quite creative.

• 1. Radio the facility that just cleared you for the approach. In many cases they are reachable on the same frequency you just left. In cases where this does not apply, flight service stations (FSS) sometimes have an RCO on site. Some airports have RCOs to different TRACON frequencies than the one you just left; this RCO would also work. (See #2)
  
  2. Radio FSS on the radio (if FSS has an RCO or other receiver nearby) and ask them to close the flight plan.
  
  3. Call 1-800-WX-BRIEF, press 1 for briefer, and select any state. Tell the briefer you'd like to close the plan.
  
  4. Call the U.S. IFR Clearance Delivery Hotline 1-800-766-8267. This is fairly non-standard but could work in an unusual scenario.
  
  5. If you know the TRACON or Center's phone number, you may call them and tell them you've landed.
  
  6. Use the approach control frequency you were just on or guard on 121.5 to reach someone flying overhead and ask them to relay to ATC or FSS that you've landed. This would work in cases where you could still hear other aircraft on the frequency but could not hear the controller. The controller/FSS operator likely would not hear your transmissions directly.

Talan2000 wrote: 4. WOW. Just noticed the Missed Approach is to a NON-Standard LEFT Hand holding pattern. Would have been nice if they called attention to tht in the plate! Ugh. I think that would be a RIGHT turn to Parallel Entry. Glad I didn't have to go Missed!

This one's on you. If they put a note for every deviation from standard on charts we wouldn't be able to read them. Brief the approach and the missed every time.

Holy Cow HR!

I had no idea how goofed up this approach was! A lot to digest...

1. I had no idea about the approach intercept angle limitation - that looks to be from the ATC manual so I guess I don't feel bad about that. How does a PILOT know this?(I figured I could do any intercept I wanted to any approach that didn't specifically depict an entry...) Just Blown away that there is NO Legal way to fly this from the North via RIGLI...

2. Protected/Not Protected: I'm with you about RIGLI definitively depicting protected airspace along the outbound leg with 10NM at or above 3400 as depicted (unless there's a really big wave but I'm not sure I buy the you cant do a procedure turn because you're "not protected" south of RIGLI. Especially if one stays at or above 3400 as depicted.

Note also that there is a "feeder route" (and I freely admit I didn't watch the video in advance and definitely didn't know this until 5 min ago)...but there is a feeder route at 3400 coming up from SXC (as an aside it seems weird that the feeder (5NM) doesn't go all the way to RIGLI).

Anyhow, it doesn't seem one can assert that there is no protection south of RIGLI, North of SXC at or above 3400 -- as a reason for prohibiting a (procedure) turn AT SXC or AT RIGLI to head north to outbound leg. Point 1 probably totally makes this moot/irrelevant...but I can see someone making a left 95, er 89 degree turn from SXC at 3400 N to the outbound course -- would that be illegal as my 180 was?

3. Circling: Again, I had no idea what these limits were and thought it was pilot's discretion. Thanks for sharing that is awesome info. I wonder how many IFR rated guys know that or how many VOR approaches are executed these days? I must confess, that I feel no remorse about leaving the FAC to establish myself on a base leg -- at about (4 DME SXC). With your data it looks like I could do that legally at SXC DME 2.8 + 0.5NM = 3.3 DME SXC as a CATB King Air. I guess it wasn't circling per se, it was what? Leaving the approach .7 early?? I would do it again (real world) 100 out of 100 times based on being VFR and seeing traffic in the pattern and having no desire to jam myself up against the traffic pattern with very little final leg to a hilltop runway. So am I right in understanding this is technically in error/illegal? By about ....40 seconds? Hmmm. Forest/trees here...my goal was to get it on the numbers as safely as possible.

4. MAFPI - thanks for that clarification. I'll tuck that away.

5. Closing IFR: I'd bet 90% of people cancel in air with ATC prior to handoff. I'm glad that my gut instinct to phone home or 800 WX BRIEF or FSS was correct. I was more worried about that for the sim than I would have been real world I think. Thanks for clarifying.

6. "Turns at non-towered airports must be made to the left according to 14 CFR 91.126." Probably not getting the context right here, but that's not at all universally correct. This non towered field has RIGHT Traffic on 22. (they really want to keep you away from the SE side of the field -- I'm sure that's where my previously postulated volcano is

7. I don't blame the controller at all- just as in real life I had a plan ahead of time that I'd bet didn't jibe with what he expected - viz. Hit the VOR procedure turn north, descend (in other words shoot the approach!). I think he expected me to just descend straight on the FAC..hmm...so I guess he did goof per your ATC manual.

Oh well, I guess I'm going to definitely refly this particular gem - but I'm still calling it a pass

Ok, I just re-flew this approach. Ignore the horrible navigation on V21 if you can. Anyway - this time ATC vectored me around to the East and back. Much more pleasant and gentle setup then the from the north 180 I earlier flew. So far, so good.

I held off circling until 3.3 DME SXC (1.5 NM circling rule and noting MAFPI(2.8) is 1.0NM from runway. I had to put in a sharp left turn for a 3 second Right Base 22.with and immediate right turn to a final, overshooting and landing long on the 3000ft hilltop rwy.

http://peaware.pilotedge.net/flight.cfm?id=81521

If that's the legal way to get in with circling, I think it's safer to be illegal, and turn early. I guess you could also turn right 270 and come in on a base after catching your breath, but now you are losing sight of the rwy -- if it really is IMC thats not a good plan either. If you are bored, try this approach in kingair C90 or comparable and see what you think.

Todd

Hello,

I know I'm a little late to this discussion but I want to clarify a couple points and add my views on a couple of points you just brought up.

2. Protected/Not Protected: I'm with you about RIGLI definitively depicting protected airspace along the outbound leg with 10NM at or above 3400 as depicted (unless there's a really big wave but I'm not sure I buy the you cant do a procedure turn because you're "not protected" south of RIGLI. Especially if one stays at or above 3400 as depicted.

Procedures in IFR flights are based on the worst case scenario weather wise. While yes in this case there is no obstacle you are going to hit by doing a procedure turn east of the FAC, you can end up causing problems in other ways.

While I can't be sure on why the procedure turn is done to the west my guess is that this prevents conflicts with traffic on V21. A PT to the east could conflict with traffic on V21.

Note that regulations require you to follow instrument approach procedures as depicted, specifically 91.175 imposes this requirement.

1. I had no idea about the approach intercept angle limitation - that looks to be from the ATC manual so I guess I don't feel bad about that. How does a PILOT know this?(I figured I could do any intercept I wanted to any approach that didn't specifically depict an entry...) Just Blown away that there is NO Legal way to fly this from the North via RIGLI...

I want to add 1 point here, this restriction only applies to unpublished routes for RNAV equipment aircraft. If you are on V21 going to SXC it is legal to conduct the approach from SXC (even with the sharp turn). If you are /A you can turn at SXC from any direction to include a 180 degree turn legally. The reason for this restriction is not for terrain, but for GPS sequencing and turn anticipation reasons.

Some controllers choose to comply with this for all aircraft. I don't know what suffix you file, but that could be part of the reason for the differences in handling you had.

Anyhow, it doesn't seem one can assert that there is no protection south of RIGLI, North of SXC at or above 3400 -- as a reason for prohibiting a (procedure) turn AT SXC or AT RIGLI to head north to outbound leg. Point 1 probably totally makes this moot/irrelevant...but I can see someone making a left 95, er 89 degree turn from SXC at 3400 N to the outbound course -- would that be illegal as my 180 was?

The TERPS criteria sort of cover this, and sort of don't. Note that this really only relates to how the controller can clear you. You can assume that if a controller clears you for an approach that the way they are doing so is legal. You can also assume that if they are unable that there is some reason for that.

Or in other words, this isn't within the area that a pilot has to worry about. Now with that said here are some specifics.

Per the TERPS an approach can only have 1 procedure turn and it must be after the IAF and before the IF. The IAF is RIGLI, therefore a procedure turn at SXC is not allowed. You can make arguments that go against this but the reality is the TERPS get the only say in this and there is no way around them.

However per the TERPS a sharp turn at SXC from V21 is ok for all aircraft, and from any direction for non RNAV aircraft. The reason for this is not terrain, but GPS sequencing problems. I don't know the specifics of this issue so that's all I can say on it. This is one of those weird rules that exist in the ATC world.

So on V21 your sharp turn is ok. So is a 89 degree turn at SXC. The reason why 91 make it "bad" isn't directly stated anywhere and can be considered arbitrary. Arguments can be made against it, but in this case the controller manual says we can't do it, so we can't do it.

Again, I had no idea what these limits were and thought it was pilot's discretion. Thanks for sharing that is awesome info. I wonder how many IFR rated guys know that or how many VOR approaches are executed these days? I must confess, that I feel no remorse about leaving the FAC to establish myself on a base leg -- at about (4 DME SXC). With your data it looks like I could do that legally at SXC DME 2.8 + 0.5NM = 3.3 DME SXC as a CATB King Air. I guess it wasn't circling per se, it was what? Leaving the approach .7 early?? I would do it again (real world) 100 out of 100 times based on being VFR and seeing traffic in the pattern and having no desire to jam myself up against the traffic pattern with very little final leg to a hilltop runway. So am I right in understanding this is technically in error/illegal? By about ....40 seconds? Hmmm. Forest/trees here...my goal was to get it on the numbers as safely as possible.

The simple answer here is that once you get the airport in sight to ask for the visual approach. Once you are on the visual approach you can maneuver as you like. Otherwise you have to comply with the approach per regulations. Honestly in this case the .7 miles in unlikely to make much of a difference, but the limits are the limits.

1.b. With NO tower it seems you can circle however you want...HYPOTHETICAL: What if circling WAS allowed to the SE and 22 had LEFT traffic as is more usual - how would you have circled??

To actually answer this question as I think Harold mis-read it.

Overfly the airport and enter left downwind for 22. The AIM specifically allows this method of entry (5-4-20).

If you are bored, try this approach in kingair C90 or comparable and see what you think.

And that is why the IMC circle is the most dangerous maneuver in IFR flying. Airlines are generally banned from doing them in anything but VMC.

Peter

Thanks for adding your perspective. It actually amuses me somewhat that I am always and unintentionally finding myself in the middle of grey areas.

I did all my procedure turns to the west so the east didn't come up.
Though I believe the barb is just a recommended direction not mandatory. I see no need to ever diverge from s depicted direction for the turn.

That said I think I'm now back to being confused. It seems you are saying my planned blue V21 entry is ok or at least ok in my c152/A but maybe not ok in my king air/g??? That strikes me as well ...crazy.

TERPS: that's another big book of knowledge I've never heard of so you have me at a disadvantage yet again. Still I think we're getting into syntax - sure an approach can only have one PT depicted but that doesn't make my PT entry at rigli or sxc illegal, no? Just as one can come in from the west or east or nw or se or any compass direction one wants on a vot approach. The entry simply isn't depicted so sure you can say "thou shalt comply with the approach as depicted" but I don't see how any of my entries fail to comply with a approach that doesn't specify an entry.

As to "requesting the visual before establishing myself on a base outside of the circling limit of 1,3 or 1,5 nm -- who exactly am I to make that request of? SoCal has already cut me loose to CTAf And even if they hadn't by the time they could respond I've missed my turn opportunity. I was vmc but it would seem to me that getting a longer final segment would be even more important if one broke out at 4.5 dme instead of waiting to 3,3 dme. It just seems like such. Common sense to me.

This really is an awful approach because you really are set up for a left downwind on 4 and trying to jam into a r&r base on 22 at 3.3 dme is just ugly.

Also it would seem that a lot of confusion could be eliminated if they dropped a hold iaf at sxc like the sager intersection ils-20r at KSNA.

I'm going to write the FAA a stern letter

That said I think I'm now back to being confused. It seems you are saying my planned blue V21 entry is ok or at least ok in my c152/A but maybe not ok in my king air/g??? That strikes me as well ...crazy.

Yup and it drives me crazy too. That however is the rule that we have to follow.

TERPS: that's another big book of knowledge I've never heard of so you have me at a disadvantage yet again. Still I think we're getting into syntax - sure an approach can only have one PT depicted but that doesn't make my PT entry at rigli or sxc illegal, no? Just as one can come in from the west or east or nw or se or any compass direction one wants on a vot approach. The entry simply isn't depicted so sure you can say "thou shalt comply with the approach as depicted" but I don't see how any of my entries fail to comply with a approach that doesn't specify an entry.

Going back to your original post, the red and blue lines are "legal" ways to conduct the approach from a pilot point of view. This means if you do end up doing it that way you have not violated any regulation.

However, a controller cannot legally clear you to do either if you are in an RNAV aircraft (this is what Harold was getting at in the first reply). So you'll never get a clearance that would result in you needing to fly it your way in an RNAV aircraft. As happened in your second flight you were vectored to the south to make the turn at SXC (or RIGLI) under 90 degrees.

If the controller makes a mistake and violates these rules you as the pilot cannot get in trouble for it as you've not violated a pilot regulation. The controller however can get in trouble (this was what I was getting at with "only relates to how the controller can clear you"). The 91.175 regulation reference is more for the early circle, not the turn at SXC/RIGLI part of the discussion (I wasn't very clear on that before).

In a non-rnav aircraft those methods are legal and can happen. They can also happen in an RNAV aircraft if you arrive at SXC on V21.

As to "requesting the visual before establishing myself on a base outside of the circling limit of 1,3 or 1,5 nm -- who exactly am I to make that request of? SoCal has already cut me loose to CTAf And even if they hadn't by the time they could respond I've missed my turn opportunity. I was vmc but it would seem to me that getting a longer final segment would be even more important if one broke out at 4.5 dme instead of waiting to 3,3 dme. It just seems like such. Common sense to me.

It would be from SOCAL and you are right in that in a lot of cases making that request is impracticable. Regarding the early circle, what I can say is this:

It does result in you leaving protected airspace during your maneuver, on an instrument checkride or IPC that would be grounds for a failure. Does it rise to a regulation violation, maybe. Are you likely to ever be called out on that violation, most likely not. Will you hit something, maybe (the odds of this obviously goes up as the weather goes down). The fact that you are VMC is good in terms of not hitting stuff, but doesn't change the IFR rules. Is circling in IMC dangerous, YES.

Though I believe the barb is just a recommended direction not mandatory. I see no need to ever diverge from s depicted direction for the turn.

The direction is mandatory, the method of turn is suggested (45-180-45). You will not have 10 miles of protection on the non depicted side.

That's all I have on it.

Peter,

Well awesome, that's good info and appreciate the clarification.

I actually had an evil regulation question pop into my mind -- so what if you commence circling on an IFR/IMC approach like this but in the midst of circling you lose sight of the field as the clouds lower another 100 ft below minimums ?

How does one execute a missed approach while circling??

T

Talan2000 wrote:Peter,

Well awesome, that's good info and appreciate the clarification.

I actually had an evil regulation question pop into my mind -- so what if you commence circling on an IFR/IMC approach like this but in the midst of circling you lose sight of the field as the clouds lower another 100 ft below minimums ?

How does one execute a missed approach while circling??

T

I'll try to answer this one. I am not sure on a regulation regarding this, but the AIM says the following,

AIM 5-4-21c, Missed Approach

 If visual reference is lost while circling-to-land from an instrument approach, the missed approach specified for that particular procedure must be followed (unless an alternate missed approach procedure is specified by ATC). To become established on the prescribed missed approach course, the pilot should make an initial climbing turn toward the landing runway and continue the turn until established on the missed approach course. Inasmuch as the circling maneuver may be accomplished in more than one direction, different patterns will be required to become established on the prescribed missed approach course, depending on the aircraft position at the time visual reference is lost. Adherence to the procedure will help assure that an aircraft will remain laterally within the circling and missed approach obstruction clearance areas. Refer to paragraph h concerning vertical obstruction clearance when starting a missed approach at other than the MAP.

Well look at that - they do think of everything! Thanks

Todd