Clear for the visual rny xx

WannFly

WannFly

Final Approach
Joined
Nov 28, 2016
Messages
6,553
Location
KLZU
Display Name
Display name:
Priyo
when the controller say "clear for the visual runway xx" and if the pilot determines that it will not be possible to maintain cloud clearance / visibility due to haze or whatever, what is the correct way to say "thanks, but no thanks, we will be flying the approach"?

i am guessing something like - negative, 21k requesting ILS to 18 with vectors to final, or something like 21k unable visual, request direct to <put FAF here>
 
In order to be cleared for the visual, you have to have reported the airport in sight first. If you don't think you're going to be able to fly a visual approach, don't report it in sight.

If they are advertising visuals on the ATIS, but you don't think it's going to work, request vectors for the approach.

If you HAVE reported it in sight, they clear you for the visual, and you subsequently determine that it's not going to work, you need to tell ATC exactly that - you lost sight of the airport and require vectors for the ILS.
 
‘Archer 123 we’ll be unable to maintain visual, like to remain on the approach’

Remember, every request can stated in plain English
 
By the time you get "cleared for the visual" it might be too late to vector you for an instrument approach. This is best clarified well ahead of time. Normally you should not be getting a visual approach unless you reported the airport in sight.
 
sarangan said:
By the time you get "cleared for the visual" it might be too late to vector you for an instrument approach. This is best clarified well ahead of time. Normally you should not be getting a visual approach unless you reported the airport in sight.
Click to expand...
:yeahthat:
 
WannFly said:
when the controller say "clear for the visual runway xx" and if the pilot determines that it will not be possible to maintain cloud clearance / visibility due to haze or whatever, what is the correct way to say "thanks, but no thanks, we will be flying the approach"?

i am guessing something like - negative, 21k requesting ILS to 18 with vectors to final, or something like 21k unable visual, request direct to <put FAF here>
Click to expand...

Yup. Something like you said. Sooner the better. Most of the time you should be able to see it coming back when you were being vectored for it, before the ‘clearance’ came. That can’t happen until you see the airport or the plane ahead of you to follow.
 
Last edited:
"Unable, Request {...}"

Russ's point is even better. Don't report the airport or preceding aircraft in sight until you are ready to accept a visual approach.

Also, when you're ready for a visual approach clearance, report the field in sight.
 
Larry in TN said:
"Unable, Request {...}"

Russ's point is even better. Don't report the airport or preceding aircraft in sight until you are ready to accept a visual approach.

Also, when you're ready for a visual approach clearance, report the field in sight.
Click to expand...
Yup. Or “I’ll need.”
 
RussR said:
In order to be cleared for the visual, you have to have reported the airport in sight first. If you don't think you're going to be able to fly a visual approach, don't report it in sight.

If they are advertising visuals on the ATIS, but you don't think it's going to work, request vectors for the approach.

If you HAVE reported it in sight, they clear you for the visual, and you subsequently determine that it's not going to work, you need to tell ATC exactly that - you lost sight of the airport and require vectors for the ILS.
Click to expand...

Or sight of any traffic that was included in the Clearance. Don’t be a PSA182
 
To be slightly pedantic, you don't always need the airport in sight, just the preceding aircraft.
 
Consider every clearance an option for you to consider. If for any reason you cannot or do not want to comply, do not read the clearance back as given, reply with what you need or rather have. If asked if airport in sight, simply reply you are requesting to do the approach. We do this for training frequently.
 
I will never call the proceeding aircraft in sight, regardless if I see him or not. Too often I lose them, especially at night in the city lights.
 
Radar Contact said:
I take it you fly for American. :)
Click to expand...

iu


:p
 
Radar Contact said:
I take it you fly for American. :)
Click to expand...
Kevin,

What is the operational advantage that you get at ORD, when running three parallel arrivals, by using a visual approach clearance instead of an ILS clearance? It seems like we're vectored to final in either case so it doesn't make much difference to us but Final is still asking us to report the field for the visual.
 
Larry in TN said:
What is the operational advantage that you get at ORD, when running three parallel arrivals, by using a visual approach clearance instead of an ILS clearance?
Click to expand...

He'll be able to give you the technical details, but Kevin and I discussed this exact question (over a number of frosty beverages!) at a fly-in, and I came away with a change in how I looked at the situation, to the point where I took it up the chain and had it mentioned in my airline's safety magazine. As I'm sure you know there are a number of pilots that will not accept a visual approach, especially when there's no apparent operational advantage (such as at ORD). And a lot of times that's manifest by guys simply not calling the preceding traffic or airport in sight, even if they see it. I don't operate like this myself, but I never saw any harm in that attitude until Kevin started making fun of my eyesight (heh!) and it let to this discussion. As such I've been trying to at least get these 'no visual' guys to inform approach at initial check-in so spacing can be adjusted well in advance, and not on the vector to final.
 
Larry in TN said:
Kevin,

What is the operational advantage that you get at ORD, when running three parallel arrivals, by using a visual approach clearance instead of an ILS clearance? It seems like we're vectored to final in either case so it doesn't make much difference to us but Final is still asking us to report the field for the visual.
Click to expand...
We have to go further out on the downwind for triple ILS’s vs ILS in the middle and visuals on the outboards. It’s in order to have altitude sep between all 3 runways (North turns on at 4, middle 7 or above, south 5/6) established, cleared, speeds read back and shipped to the tower so the final monitor with override can verify you’re up before losing altitude sep with parallel traffic. The monitor is there in case y’all drift into each other for immediate breakaways. Therefor you get your final speed 25 miles out.

On visuals I can keep you on the freq to the marker massaging the speeds to be very efficient at the threshold. Higher up in the airlines they want one crossing the threshold as the other turns on to the high speed. Additionally, I can turn you in tighter on the airport so gaps don’t go by. Technically you just need the visual clearance before losing 1000/3 with the parallel traffic. It just provides a more efficient flow with more flexibility and control of the planes to land more per hour. It also uses 3 less people at our facility which is already critically short. We don’t have to staff the parallel monitor scopes. That’s never a factor in our decision. We run visuals until it doesn’t work and then do ILS’s. It’s just annoying when everyone sees the traffic or airport except one guy. Even when the guys behind report it in sight. In that case, the guy that can’t see will be broken out until we get the people in place to run simul ILS’s and then re-sequenced.

There’s more to it but gets complicated to type (i.e. turning less than required behind a heavy safely above their wake with them faster than you and pulling away so you do get the mileage...we’d need vis sep for that, etc).

Hope that explains it a little.
 
I keep saying it, the overhead is the most efficient IFR (VMC) arrival. Passengers won’t like it but it’s a blessing for controllers.
 
Friend at ATL said they can push more aircraft in the visual. 132 per hr on the visual vs 98-110 per hr on the IlS. Visual is their preferred method of arrival.
 
sarangan said:
By the time you get "cleared for the visual" it might be too late to vector you for an instrument approach. This is best clarified well ahead of time. Normally you should not be getting a visual approach unless you reported the airport in sight.
Click to expand...
It's never to late to be vectored for an approach. "Bugsmasher xxx, this isn't going to work out, could I get vectors and some time to set up for xxx approach" Never be rushed into something you are not ready for, or forced into something you don't want to do.
 
Radar Contact said:
We have to go further out on the downwind for triple ILS’s vs ILS in the middle and visuals on the outboards. It’s in order to have altitude sep between all 3 runways
Click to expand...
Now that makes sense, thanks! I hadn't noticed that the visual were only on the outboards. (Hey, I always want 27L, A1 to Northport, but that's another story)

You guys are pretty good about giving us our final speed about a half-mile after we've started down on the G/S!

It’s just annoying when everyone sees the traffic or airport except one guy.
Click to expand...
There's a good chance that the "one guy" is someone who isn't familiar with ORD. Being based in ORD, it's easy to pick it out and to have the confidence that I'll be able to maintain the visual with the airport as I know exactly where it should be. The once or twice a year I go to ATL I'm much less likely to report the field because it takes longer to be sure I'm seeing the correct runway and have confidence that I won't lose it again.

Then there's probably some who report the field based on seeing it on the nav display! LOL

Do you normally work a position? I've heard Jamie on the frequency many times but have never been able to pick you out. Figured you might be working a supervisor position, or something else, that keeps you off mike.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top