Even ENHA once used to have an NDB approach available even outside of ATS hours
Didn’t know that. I don’t know exactly what the rules about IFR approaches and airports are here in Norway. I only assumed the regulations at Avinor airports (in G airspace) was according to regulations, but it may very well only be Avinor practice for all I know.
What exactly is a VFR arrival procedure in controlled airspace? There is no single “standard” procedure, you can do whatever you get a clearance to do, and it varies between airports and weather, traffic etc. The only place you have something that can be called a “standard” VFR arrival procedure, is at unattended airports (no radio, no nothing), places where IFR is out of the question.
Look at this chart: http://www.lfv.se/AIP/AD/AD%202/ESSB/ES_AD_2_ESSB_6-4_en.pdf
If runway 30 is in use, and you are arriving VFR from the west, you are expected to present yourself at ÄLVNÄS. There you will typically get a clearance to BJÖRNHOLMEN and you are expected to follow the charted route via KUNGSHATT rather than direct, without being told. Once at BJÖRNHOLMEN you will be expected to hold until you get an approach clearance.
If departing VFR to the east, you will get a departure clearance to EDSVIKEN. Again, you are expected to follow the charted route without being told – not fly direct.
Besides, 800 m visibility sounds very helicopter to me, in VMC.
I did say that 800 m was less than VMC — that is the reason I’m surprised that visual approaches (IFR!) are permitted down to 800 m visibility. I guess it is possible to pull one off if the low visibility is because of low and thin fog layer which doesn’t much impact visibility at high viewing angles to the ground.
Yes, that’s the VFR routes chart. You should follow the routes, but you can get clearence to do other things. But take a look at this VAC at Kristiansund:
https://www.ippc.no/norway_aip/current/aip/ad/enkb/EN_AD_2_ENKB_6-1_en.pdf
Then the VAC at ENVA:
https://www.ippc.no/norway_aip/current/aip/ad/enva/EN_AD_2_ENVA_6-1_en.pdf
What I mean is simply that there are no “default” VFR approach in controlled air space. Likewise there seems not to be any default visual approach procedure.
The regulations on this seems sparse. Apart from a minimum of 800 m flight visibility (yes!) I do not find any requirements for a visual approach.
On a couple of occasions I have been reminded that ATC expects aircraft to fly a reasonably straight line with a heading that will take them where they are cleared to. That goes for both VFR and IFR/visual. If told to report on final, that means heading straight for base turn or final turn, whichever is closest.
Obviously, what ATC expects does matter.
LeSving, the old Hamar IAP from 1997 is still on the airfield homepage: http://www.hamarlufthavn.no/ial-og-aip.html
Although decommissioned, apparently you can still fly it.
I have not thought about those 800 m for a long time, but I now remember a story, told many years ago by a now senior (and grown-up!) flight instructor. He was approaching a small airport IFR/IMC with a NDB-only approach. The ceiling was clearly below minimums, but a couple of miles from the airport the pilot found a hole in the cloud deck, was cleared for a visual approach, dived down to about tree top height and followed a road to the runway and landed.
Although not in line with all the CDFA talk that the CAA likes these days, I cannot find a rule that deems the procedure illegal. But it certainly sounded risky.
To me a visual approach is just for making everything faster, smoother and easier on CAVOK-like days, when approaching from the other side of the ILS.
