When to descend II

Bee wrote:

Newps wrote:




You're doing to the visual approach, it's irrelevant what fix I send
you too. It could be a charted one or one I simply made up out of
thin air.


Okay, I get it. The IAP is not even in the plan. IFR to a fix, then
visual or, if unable, a new plan. Maybe, the at or above 2,000 at ROYCE
was to keep the pilot at MVA instead of for traffic? You think maybe so?


MVA is irrelevant if you're getting a visual. Like I said earlier it
most likely aids separation from aircraft going to another airport.

Bee wrote:




Or, it could have been to assure MVA until ROYCE.


That is definitely not the case. He was at a good altitude prior to
this clearance. Aircraft reports airport. Controller says cleared for
the visual. MVA now irrelevant as separation from the ground/obstacles
is now pilots responsibility.

Newps wrote:


Bee wrote:

Newps wrote:




You're doing to the visual approach, it's irrelevant what fix I send
you too. It could be a charted one or one I simply made up out of
thin air.



Okay, I get it. The IAP is not even in the plan. IFR to a fix, then
visual or, if unable, a new plan. Maybe, the at or above 2,000 at
ROYCE was to keep the pilot at MVA instead of for traffic? You think
maybe so?



MVA is irrelevant if you're getting a visual. Like I said earlier it
most likely aids separation from aircraft going to another airport.

You don't have to abide by MVA as the minimum altitude prior to the fix
at which you clear me for a visual?

Newps wrote:



Bee wrote:




Or, it could have been to assure MVA until ROYCE.



That is definitely not the case. He was at a good altitude prior to
this clearance. Aircraft reports airport. Controller says cleared for
the visual. MVA now irrelevant as separation from the ground/obstacles
is now pilots responsibility.

But, the clearance for the visual was for a future point in space; i.e.,
ROYCE, which was still to be crossed.

OK, now how does this change if, prior to reaching ROYCE, we are switched to
the tower and Tower says Cessna 123, cleared to land. (The OP did receive
such a clearance, but it was not clear where he was at the time)Does the
altitude restriction still hold?

I would say no, as, to me, 'Cleared to land' means that I am now in control
of my heading and altitude
"B A R R Y" wrote in message
...
Dan Luke wrote:
You're 4 miles SW of ROYCE.

http://www.naco.faa.gov/d-tpp/0710/00198IL12R.PDF

Approach says "Cessna '1GS,cross ROYCE at or above 2 thousand, cleared
visual approach runwy 12R. Contact the tower on 118.7."

On initial contact, Tower says "Cessna '1GS, runwy 12R, cleared to land."

Do you still have to cross ROYCE at 2,000 or can you head for the numbers
and come on down?


From 4SW of Royce...

I'd go to Royce as instructed, and begin my visual descent after crossing
Royce, making my right turn inbound, and visually identifying the airport.

Crossing Royce @ 2000 doesn't make for an uncomfortable descent, and it's
not so far out of the way, so I don't think I'd bother to question the
clearance.

If things weren't busy, I'd probably just ask if I can head for the
numbers once I was on with the tower.

pgbnh wrote:
OK, now how does this change if, prior to reaching ROYCE, we are switched to
the tower and Tower says Cessna 123, cleared to land. (The OP did receive
such a clearance, but it was not clear where he was at the time)Does the
altitude restriction still hold?

I would say no, as, to me, 'Cleared to land' means that I am now in control
of my heading and altitude

Not until you reach ROYCE and the visual approach clearance becomes
effective.

Just like reporting the OM to the tower when the weather is 200 and 1/2
and the tower says "Cleared to land."

Bee wrote:
But, the clearance for the visual was for a future point in space; i.e.,
ROYCE, which was still to be crossed.

Is this really the case? I hear clearances for visual approaches with
altitude restrictions all the time. Normally the restriction is not
based on a point in space (fix) but rather on a distance from the
airport (or VOR) or until crossing a radial of a VOR.

I've never heard of a "future" approach clearance.

Dan Luke wrote:
The vector I was on was a "right base" for the ILS, not the intercept vector.

Sorry for being ****y about it, but it really would have helped to
have all the information in the original post. There has been a lot
of wasted discussion about what you really meant because you left out
key information.

First, you were being vectored for the ILS, thus the mention of the
FAF in your clearance for the visual.

Second, on a "right base" you were probably heading something like 40
degrees.

Now, I'm having to guess again: if you were really SW (not just W) and
the controller was planning on giving you the usual 30 degree
intercept to some 3 miles before ROYCE, you were probably at a minimum
5 miles from ROYCE, but likely closer to 10. In this case, it makes
less sense to continue to the localizer before turning final, although
that is always still an option, and, in my opinion, what the
controller wanted.

I didn't request the visual, just called the field in sight; perhaps that's
splitting hairs.

Yeah, I think its splitting hairs. Why would you call the field in
sight if you weren't requesting the visual?

In fact, I'd go one step further and say that the controller
understood your call of the field in sight as a request for a short
cut because you didn't want to go all the way to the FAF and shoot the
ILS. And he wasn't prepared to give you a short cut, thus the ROYCE
restriction.

However I'm not sure how "proper" that clearance was. It would have
made sense to tell you to make a 7 mile final, and even to cross 7 DME
at 2000 feet, but asking you to cross a fix that is no longer on your
route doesn't seem correct to me.

wrote:

Bee wrote:

But, the clearance for the visual was for a future point in space; i.e.,
ROYCE, which was still to be crossed.


Is this really the case? I hear clearances for visual approaches with
altitude restrictions all the time. Normally the restriction is not
based on a point in space (fix) but rather on a distance from the
airport (or VOR) or until crossing a radial of a VOR.

I've never heard of a "future" approach clearance.


What the OP stated,

Approach says "Cessna '1GS,cross ROYCE at or above 2 thousand, cleared
visual approach runwy 12R. Contact the tower on 118.7."

I didn't say "future approach clearance." I said the present clearance
did not make the visual applicable until a future point in space.

That happens all the time, "Cross ARNES at 10,000, cleared Runway 25L ILS."

Bee wrote:
I didn't say "future approach clearance." I said the present clearance
did not make the visual applicable until a future point in space.

I still don't understand what it means for the approach clearance to
not be applicable. You can be given instructions with a clearance for
the visual, but that doesn't mean that you are not navigating visually
to the airport.

Such as, at OAK they frequently say "cross 6 DME at or above 2000
feet" and at SBA they tell folks to "remain off shore until turning
base." Those instructions don't delay the applicability of the
clearance for the visual approach, whatever that would mean.

If the controller doesn't intend on a visual to be "applicable" then
why would he issue the clearance? And if it weren't "applicable" then
would the OP still have been getting vectors until such time as the
clearance became "applicable"? I don't think so.