If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#71
|
|||
|
|||
When to descend II
"Bee" wrote in message ... So, it is now okay to descend into that traffic that you speculated exists in your early post in this thread? Traffic wasn't an issue. If the controller is using vertical separation between the OP's aircraft and traffic beneath him that lower traffic would also require an altitude restriction that insured separation. The minimum separation is 1000' if the lower aircraft is IFR and 500' if it's VFR, but the altitude restriction cannot be lower than the MVA. Look at the approach plate, there is a 593 MSL tower about four miles southwest of ROYCE, the MVA can't be lower than 1600 MSL within three miles of that tower, and it's probably higher. Do the math. |
#72
|
|||
|
|||
When to descend II
On Nov 9, 8:20 am, "Steven P. McNicoll"
wrote: "Bee" wrote in ... He was cleared to ROYCE with an altitude. Nothing on the OP's message required the aircraft to cross ROYCE. So do you think it was a malformed clearance, or the OP misheard it? What would you do and/or say if you got exactly that clearance? ("Cessna '1GS,cross ROYCE at or above 2 thousand, cleared visual approach runwy 12R. Contact the tower on 118.7." ) Thanks! John Clonts Temple, Texas |
#73
|
|||
|
|||
When to descend II
"John Clonts" wrote in message ups.com... So do you think it was a malformed clearance, or the OP misheard it? Could be either, but it's definitely one of them. What would you do and/or say if you got exactly that clearance? ("Cessna '1GS,cross ROYCE at or above 2 thousand, cleared visual approach runwy 12R. Contact the tower on 118.7." ) I'd respond, "Unable". You can't pin an aircraft down to a specific route on a visual approach, he's got to remain clear of clouds so you've got to allow him to maneuver as needed. If the controller needed the aircraft over ROYCE he should stick to the ILS approach. Why the controller issued the altitude restriction is a mystery. |
#74
|
|||
|
|||
When to descend II
"Steven P. McNicoll" wrote: So do you think it was a malformed clearance, or the OP misheard it? Could be either, but it's definitely one of them. I think I have probably mis-remembered it. Upon reflection, I believe I was most likely already on the localizer, not SW of ROYCE. However, my memory is clear about being given the visual with the crossing restriction, then being immediately cleared to land. -- Dan T-182T at BFM |
#75
|
|||
|
|||
When to descend II
"Dan Luke" wrote in message ... I think I have probably mis-remembered it. Upon reflection, I believe I was most likely already on the localizer, not SW of ROYCE. However, my memory is clear about being given the visual with the crossing restriction, then being immediately cleared to land. The clearance issued doesn't make sense. If the controller really needs you over ROYCE he shouldn't issue a visual approach clearance. On a visual approach you must remain clear of clouds and maneuvering to avoid them could take you away from ROYCE. A visual doesn't save time when it's issued to an aircraft on the localizer and may take longer than the IAP if cloud avoidance is needed. The altitude restriction doesn't make any sense at all. Terrain/obstacle avoidance is the pilot's responsibility on a visual so it can't be for that and there isn't enough room below at 2000 MSL for any other traffic so it can't be for separation. |
#76
|
|||
|
|||
When to descend II
"Steven P. McNicoll" wrote: The clearance issued doesn't make sense. If the controller really needs you over ROYCE he shouldn't issue a visual approach clearance. On a visual approach you must remain clear of clouds and maneuvering to avoid them could take you away from ROYCE. A visual doesn't save time when it's issued to an aircraft on the localizer and may take longer than the IAP if cloud avoidance is needed. The altitude restriction doesn't make any sense at all. Terrain/obstacle avoidance is the pilot's responsibility on a visual so it can't be for that and there isn't enough room below at 2000 MSL for any other traffic so it can't be for separation. Hmm. Evidently memory has failed me on some essential detail (altitude, perhaps?). In my experience, the Houston Approach controllers are not in the habit of issuing screwy clearances. It must be me. -- Dan T-182T at BFM |
#77
|
|||
|
|||
When to descend II
On Nov 9, 9:10 am, "Steven P. McNicoll"
wrote: "Bee" wrote in ... If you were on vectors to the ILS, the final heading for intercept couldn't be greater than 330 coming from that direction. A 330 heading to join the localizer inbound would make an intercept angle of about 160 degrees. That'd be a cute one. 150 degrees... |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
When to descend | Dan Luke[_2_] | Instrument Flight Rules | 44 | October 14th 07 09:12 AM |