Yes sure it’s an IFR procedure, but it’s still roughly a traffic circuit — same as the french situation where you fly a VFR traffic pattern as an IFR procedure
tomjnx wrote:
Yes sure it’s an IFR procedure, but it’s still roughly a traffic circuit — same as the french situation where you fly a VFR traffic pattern as an IFR procedure
A visual approach with prescribed tracks is not at all the same thing as a VFR procedure.
And I still don’t believe that a 777 on a visual approach to a French airfield has to follow the VFR traffic circuit. In fact AIP-France ENR 1.3.5 “Visual approach” says nothing about that. It does require that “the pilot observes particular instructions, if any, specific to visual approach on the considered aerodrome and manoeuvring restrictions towards runway issued by the air traffic control organisation.” That could mean specified visual approach tracks, but not VFR arrival routes/traffic circuits in general.
QuoteIn fact AIP-France ENR 1.3.5 “Visual approach” says nothing about that.
But ENR 1.1 1.5.1 c does. It applies at AFIS and uncontrolled aerodromes.
Lorsque l’aéronef, évoluant en VMC, décide d’effectuer une approche par repérage visuel du sol il doit s’intégrer dans la circulation d’aéro- drome conformément aux dispositions prévues pour les VFR au para- graphe 1.4.2.
Merci!
Maybe this is obvious, but then I’ll just state the obvious: The main difference is between controlled and uncontrolled fields. On a controlled field like Colmar, TWR can grant any route and sequence for an arriving IFR (or VFR) traffic doing a visual approach. This is what can relieve you of the need to fly the normal circuit. If a 777 were to land at an uncontrolled field, then it would have to integrate into the aerodrome traffic with everyone else, i.e. if there is a C152 already in the circuit then the 777 must not cut in front of it.
if there is a C152 already in the circuit then the 777 must not cut in front of it.
Out of interest, how does this work in the USA? (the mixing of very different speed traffic at untowered airports)
It works very well 
If you have faster traffic behind you, they will give you delay vector so the faster traffic can overtake.
Who is “they” in the context of an uncontrolled airfield?
You can have approach control even at an uncontrolled airfield.
bookworm wrote:
But ENR 1.1 1.5.1 c does. It applies at AFIS and uncontrolled aerodromes.
That makes more sense. Bosco made a general statement about visual approaches in France.
Except for the AFIS part. I don’t see any need for IFR traffic on a visual approach to follow VFR procedures when there is AFIS.
