Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Doug Taylor Let's say you're flying into Manchester, NH at night.
There's about a 2000 foot ceiling and approach says that they're executing the visual approach for runway 17. |
Well I decided to look at the VOR 17 approach into Manchester. A few things to note:
1. TDZ is 229' (for RNWY17)
2. MSA (for our area, is 3400'), Not knowing the distance from the FAF to the MHT VOR, hopefully it is within the 25NM MSA ring.
3. Doug said the ceiling is at 2000'. Well, clouds are reported in AGL, correct? And our altitude of 2000', is MSL, correct? So, we would have broken out of the clouds around 2242' (cause the Airport elevation is 242').
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Doug Taylor Nothing seems 'NOTAM'ed out so you set up for the visual approach backed up by the ILS.
He sends you down to 2000 which is the 'minimum vector altitude' and then clears you for the visual.
You can see the runway so you insist on getting cleared for the ILS.
"We didn't turn on the antennae. Do you want the VOR approach?"
"Sure"
"blahbitty blah blah" "cleared for the VOR 17 approach"
You're at the final approach fix and apparently on course just as you're tuning in the frequency and dialing-in the final approach course.
What do you do? |
Assuming that the FAF that Doug is refering to, is the VOR FAF; I would continue on the visual and land, as the ceiling is above us and not a factor.
Why do you need the VOR? You have the runway in sight, your only 5.5NM from the MAP, and 5.7NM to the runway. Plenty of time to make a normal approach to land.
Being that close, and at the FAF, you must be able to make the out he PAPI.
Briefing the ILS 17, you have to have some knowledge of where you are, what the safe altitude is around your area, etc.
So, I would scrap the VOR (Aviate, Navigate, Communicate), fly the plane; and LAND using the visual clearance we received.
Doug, what would you do?