Last minute approach change

[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.

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?

[mtsu_av8er]

If I couldn't see the runway at this point, I'd ask for vectors around for a few miles. The weather doesn't seem to be coming down, so we're not in that much of a hurry to get home.

[jtrain609]

Something tells me you're leaning towards needing to cross the FAF on a VOR approach, something about knowing exactly where you are in relation to the airport and the navaid. It's been so frigging long since I've flown I've forgotten exactly what you're after, though.

[SUSPilot]

I would ask for vectors. The worst thing you can do while flying is to fall behind the airplane. This is usually when problems occur. With that in mind, I would ask to be vectored back around to the approach. Remember you are not required to accept any clearance from ATC that you as pilot in command think will hinder the saftey of the flight, rushing through an approach in my opinion would do just that. I would decline the approach clearance and ask for vectors back to the approach.

[ILSstud]

I would ask to be vectored around so I could set up for a more stabilized approach.

[MikeD]

[ QUOTE ]
I would ask to be vectored around so I could set up for a more stabilized approach.

[/ QUOTE ]

Non-hackers.

Seriously, though, if I can see the runway, why would I insist on an ILS approach vice just continuing the visual?

[FlyChicaga]

[ QUOTE ]
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.

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?

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm going to pretend that Doug meant "can't" see the airport, since that would make a little more sense to me.

In this case, with an approach change (from an ILS to a VOR), I would ask for a complete revector. Since you are changing from a precision approach to a non-precision, it would be a good idea to rebrief the approach so both crewmembers are on the same page about setting MDA, inbound course, callouts, etc. The two types of approaches are much different. Although it will take a few more minutes to set up for the approach again, it is better to be ready and not rushed when coming in to land than having "ninja-hands" trying to reconfigure for a completely different approach type. Just my humble opinion.

When in doubt, do not be afraid to go-around and try again. Some may think it's a sign of poor planning, but really it's being a prudent and professional pilot, considering safety first.

[MikeD]

[ QUOTE ]
I'm going to pretend that Doug meant "can't" see the airport, since that would make a little more sense to me.

[/ QUOTE ]

Ahhh. "Can't" does make total sense. Copy.

[ QUOTE ]

In this case, with an approach change (from an ILS to a VOR), I would ask for a complete revector. Since you are changing from a precision approach to a non-precision, it would be a good idea to rebrief the approach so both crewmembers are on the same page about setting MDA, inbound course, callouts, etc. The two types of approaches are much different. Although it will take a few more minutes to set up for the approach again, it is better to be ready and not rushed when coming in to land than having "ninja-hands" trying to reconfigure for a completely different approach type. Just my humble opinion.

[/ QUOTE ]

But I have no one to brief the approach to....

[ QUOTE ]

When in doubt, do not be afraid to go-around and try again. Some may think it's a sign of poor planning, but really it's being a prudent and professional pilot, considering safety first.

[/ QUOTE ]

But....since we're playing the "what if" game......what if you only had 3.3 minutes of usable fuel remaining? And what if the proverbial "busload of nuns" happened to be driving across the runway?

All kidding aside, I agree with your post.

(yes....I don't have a damn thing to do right now...if you're wondering!)

[sigmanu499]

If your not set up for the approach and havent briefed it yet, then you have no choice but not to fly the approach. I would have to ask for vectors. No need to hurry, most people will complain about the delay, but would still rather be late then dead.

[flyover]

[ QUOTE ]

You can see the runway so you insist on getting cleared for the ILS. ???????

What do you do?

[/ QUOTE ]

Land on it.

[flyifrvfr]

I would be paying attention to the radio to listen to what the others I'am following are getting. If you are the only one out there and you got behind like that, I would get vectors. If memory serves me correctly, this airport is surrounded by some serious mountains. No need to be wondering where you are, brief the approach and slow down, get back ahead of the airplane.

[pavelump]

[ QUOTE ]
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.

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?

[/ QUOTE ]

Wouldn't you have already ID'd the localizer prior to that point and noticed whether the GS flag was on or not?

If the GS ant. was off, I'd request the localizer apch...

DAve

[kellwolf]

[ QUOTE ]
Wouldn't you have already ID'd the localizer prior to that point and noticed whether the GS flag was on or not?

[/ QUOTE ]

Maybe they didn't turn on the LOC antennae.

[ QUOTE ]
If the GS ant. was off, I'd request the localizer apch...

[/ QUOTE ]

Little rusty, haven't flown in 5 months....

I THINK you don't even have to request the LOC (assuming you've been cleared for the ILS). If you've got all the stuff done for the ILS, then the GS flags out, I'm pretty sure you just have to notify ATC of the loss of signal at advise you are continuing as a LOC approach.

[pavelump]

[ QUOTE ]

Maybe they didn't turn on the LOC antennae.


[/ QUOTE ]

But then you wouldn't have ever heard the Morse code in the first place right?

[ QUOTE ]

Little rusty, haven't flown in 5 months....

I THINK you don't even have to request the LOC (assuming you've been cleared for the ILS). If you've got all the stuff done for the ILS, then the GS flags out, I'm pretty sure you just have to notify ATC of the loss of signal at advise you are continuing as a LOC approach.

[/ QUOTE ]
I don't know about that, you may be right...

[jonnyb]

[ QUOTE ]
You can see the runway so you insist on getting cleared for the ILS

[/ QUOTE ]

???

[BCTAv8r]

This all sounds like another language to me. Maybe I'll understand all this once I actually start flying. What the heck is a vector?

[ROFCIBC]

[ QUOTE ]
This all sounds like another language to me. Maybe I'll understand all this once I actually start flying. What the heck is a vector?

[/ QUOTE ]

Could be one of two things...

1. A line from the movie "Airplane"

"give me a vector, Victor"

2. In reality it's an instruction in the form of a heading and possibly an altitude from a ground controller. Most widely used when transitioning from enroute to some terminal area and an approach for landing.

Technology has vastly expanded the on board capability to do this without any input from a ground controller. Both during takeoff, climb out, cruise, descent and approach/landing. However there are a lot of external things that come into play that alter this. Weather is probably the biggest. This often leads to traffic saturation. Then there is the unexpected runway closure. Or equipment malfunctions, either ground or airborne.

In short, a "vector" is help from the ground controller.

Hope this helps you.

[pscraig]

[ QUOTE ]
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.

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?

[/ QUOTE ]

I'd just take the visual, land, and discuss it on the ground. I would not be messing around with the avionics that low..

[BE19Pilot]

ummm, land:-)

[Screaming_Emu]

a barrel roll

[Bluto]

If you didn't brief the VOR, you should get vectors to give you time to brief it, as applicable per company SOP. Would you continue with a Check Airman or Fed in the js?

[Stone Cold]

How'd you get cleared for the visual without having the runway/ plane in front in sight? I won't say what I'd do, I'm a freight dog. Just kidding. Get vectors for 30 seconds or so, set the approach, and go. Shouldn't be more than 2 minutes delay total.

[mrivc211]

This kinda reminds me of that Asian-based airline ( I can't remember the name Korean Air?) That had the field in sight at night and was on the visual. Well there was a mountain between them and the airport that they never saw because of the darkness, although they had the field in sight, the came at the right place at the right time and fell below glidepath. They slammed into the mountain never knowing it was there. I'd make sure that I was well set up for this approach before accepting any kinda of clearance at night.

[kailuaboy]

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').

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?

[av8rmsu]

"Hit the BRAKES, they'll fly right by"