Visual Approach Limits

[flyinhigh]

As the title says, what are the requirements on ATC end to give us a visual approach.

eg. couple weeks ago going from yhm to ytz at 3000, about 15 miles back from ytz, we got a visual of the field. however we were unable to get the visual, but a contact was no problem.

so just wondering what is need on your end to give us a visual.
cavok, 3500', what?

[pokaroo]

Ceiling not less than 500 feet above the min IFR altitude usually the min safe 25nm unless there is a min vectoring alt we must use that AND at least 3 sm vis.

There has to be current reported weather for the airport and the aircraft has to have the airport in sight not anticipated to be in site.

That's it!

[Jerricho]

...........and it's a bloody great argument to go over the semantics

To the letter of our ManOps, thou shall not offer a visual approach to an aricraft calling visual if thou doesn't have the met criteria on the METAR/SPECI.

However this still holds true at minute 61, when the hourly hasn't been updated. Now this is where I start my conjecture.......you're the driver, you've called the field. Even if my little METAR on my screen states the limits aren't there, it may be up to an hour or more old and I can't clear you for a visual and aren't really supposed to solicit the contact.

Hmmm...........

[Geedub]

There are limits established between the tower and the centre in regards to visual approaches. At YTZ, the reported ceiling must be 3600 ft or greater and the reported ground vis 5 miles or greater.

Once again, if IFR traffic permits, the contact is ALWAYS available. Of course, you can always cancel the IFR and proceed VFR.

[Geedub]

Sorry, the limits for a visual at YTZ is a ceiling of 3100' and 5 miles vis.

My Bad.

[brokenwing]

the minimums for visuals at YTZ is 3400' and 5 miles vis. 3100 and 5 are the visual limits at YOO.

[lexx]

At controlled airports, the minimum weather limits for a visual approach is usually (but not always) close to the actual dimensions of the control zone itself. ykf is 3000' and 5 miles for example. Identical

[charlie_g]

At controlled airports, the minimum weather limits for a visual approach is usually (but not always) close to the actual dimensions of the control zone itself. ykf is 3000' and 5 miles for example. Identical

More than likely coincidence. Unless other arrangements are in place (which are quite rare, as far as I am aware), the ATC limits are:

- 500' above the minimum IFR altitude
- ground vis reported as 3+ SM

[lexx]

I guess "coincidence", or "other arrangements" pretty much covers everything doesn't it?

[charlie_g]

I guess "coincidence", or "other arrangements" pretty much covers everything doesn't it?

I suppose it could. I just don't want the impression among pilots to be "if the CZ is VMC, then visuals should be available", because the CZ dimensions have nothing to do with MANOPS requirements for a visual approach, that's all.

[jonathan_tcu]

Being new to this site, I thought I'd quickly add that radar services in the Timmins control zone, terminates at below 10 000 feet AGL, which makes our control zone non radar. I've heard many controllers ask the pilots to report field visual in a radar environment only. Or, request a visual approach before their ATC approach clearance. In other words, if Jazz 7823 drops off radar, he's asked to report 20 DME from Timmins. At this point, forget the visual, it won't happen. If the pilots sees the airport prior to radar service termination or upon ATC clearance, he will most likely get it. Other options are the contact approach or published approach and then hand off to the FSS.

Just thought I'd share this with you all

[pokaroo]

jonathan..........not quite the case, the powers that be in ottawa have said that an aircraft can do a visual approach in a non-radar environment and I do it every single VMC day. The change was a few months ago when aircraft could no longer get approval for a visual if it was anticipated, the field has to now be in sight.

[jonathan_tcu]

My correction, you're right. I heard the same rule. I've heard aircraft pilots who are just 'learning' about that rule. Sometimes, when I hear aircraft being handed off to our FSS, they will be 'cleared for AN approach and call FSS on XXX'. Should the pilot get the field visual AFTER the hand off, the pilot can ask FSS to hotline the center and approve a visual or even a contact approach that way. IN the past, a lot of YZ controllers gave and admit to giving 'provisional visual approaches' prior to comm loss and contacting the RCO FSS (London ON) before the rule changed a few months ago and that is now no longer allowed. Thanks

[brokenwing]

cz height at ykf is 4000 asl, visual limits at ykf 3000asl.

[jonathan_tcu]

Is that level 3000 feet radar or non radar?

[lexx]

cz height at ykf is 4000 asl, visual limits at ykf 3000asl.

Incorrect. Well maybe it's a typo on your part, but I think you'll find the agreement between Tower and Centre is that visual approaches will not be offered unless the the ceiling is 3000 AGL and the visibility is 5 miles. The minimum required weather limits are coincidentally the same as the zone dimensions.

Now if the IFR aircraft is doing a visual, the lowest altitude the Centre can descend the aircraft to is 3000 ASL unless there's co-ordination.

[brokenwing]

yes you are right.... typo on my part.....
yeah..... what is the purpose of not below 3000 untill advised by tower anyway?...

[lexx]

At YKF (more so in the summer) traffic volumes get heavy. Hot lines between Centre and Tower aren't always answered immediately for obvious reasons. "Not below 3000 till advised by Tower" is a bit of a safety net, to stop fast twins and jets on visuals from dropping down to circuit level before Tower has a chance to talk to them. Keeping them at 3000 for a period often helps with circuit traffic below them, and departures off crossing runways. "Not above 2500 till advised" etc.