Malibuflyer wrote:
As I read the VFR chart, there is no prescribed traffic pattern – neither to the north nor to the south. The standard way Is a (almost) straight in approach from November, Echo or Sierra. If Tower is present, Tower will tell you what to do if that leads to “the wrong end of the runway” – if not, it’s your own choice
VAC only show circuit hand & height both are north (south is noise sensitive and you may see snipers on few roofs 
), VAC does not describe flight paths without ATC/AFIS: there is the mandatory surface examination and the mandatory circuit integration (applies to both VFR & IFR as described in French law and AIP ENR & GEN, it takes 3 pages to cover all cases), there is no such thing as (almost) straight-in even if VAC seems to suggest it, I even heard “VFR locals” reminding this on RT to “IFR visitors” who just ignored (or did not get it) and carried on…
I guess it’s part of “be careful what you wish” or “you can’t have cake and eat it”: in France, you can operate IFR & VFR at any hour including at night with PCL without ATC, AFIS, AG, Flughlighter…but you have strict rules on runway examination and traffic integration, the statuoryy legal instruments behind are serious ones, it’s not an “AIP info”, it’s an “arrêté dans JO”…
gallois wrote:
Nothing wrong with SVFR, but I assume that as you had ATS you followed arrival instructions and VRPs so no need to join the circuit.
Yes it was with ATC, straight-in almost from Lydd and SVFR landing but yes if there is another traffic ATC ask to report on VRP (Boulogne-Sur-Mer)
Nothing wrong with SVFR, but I assume that as you had ATS you followed arrival instructions and VRPs so no need to join the circuit.
But I don’t think SVFR is available without ATS is it?
With ATS you’d of course do the full RNP approach to a straight in landing if 13 is in use or circle at 570ft to 31.
Ibra wrote:
I know but the rules in French AIP (ENR & GEN) does require you to go north under IFR, like it or not:
Ibra wrote:
you have to join VFR circuit on it’s downwind after your IFR circling if no ATS in tower at LeTouquet…
Ibra wrote:
VFR circuit at LeTouquet is north, I had the impression it’s clear in VFR VAC chart, or probably I mis-read this and it’s actually South?
As I read the VFR chart, there is no prescribed traffic pattern – neither to the north nor to the south. The standard way Is a (almost) straight in approach from November, Echo or Sierra. If Tower is present, Tower will tell you what to do if that leads to “the wrong end of the runway” – if not, it’s your own choice.
The only additional information on the plates is, the if you arrive to the 13 from northwest, you must not turn final lower than 1000ft.
I guess if going pessimist on IFR planning, you are looking for 900ft ceilings
I have landed there SVFR with ATC straight-in to clear customs then SVFR takeoff straight to UK or following French coast to Brittany with PPL only and 7h fuel endurance (IMCR was valid only in UK)
It feels way safer, reliable and less complicated than IFR without ATS but maybe it’s just the feeling…
To answer your last question first. I would not fly a circle to land to the North.
In planning I would probably plan for the 830ft and an alternate.
This would be down to the way I was taught and as they mention absence of QNH on the plate the pessimist side of me would prevail. Ie that for some reason or another it might not be possible to get the QNH. You could just as legitimately plan the 570(550)MDA/H that you plan.
I realise that NCO doesn’t require an alternate before anyone jumps up and down.
So I would fly the RNP approach but in my TEM I would consider those wind turbines very carefully, because yes they often do cause turbulence olten up to about 2000 ft directly above so would want to pre warn any passengers, especially those with a fear of turbulence like my wife.
If I was to go there VFR without ATS, I haven’t done that for 20 Years and would have to study the VAC very carefully because one would, on a quick look at the VAC you posted need to descend to downwind and fly the circuit to the North at 1000’ AGL and if the 13 is in use I would be much more careful at where I would descend to circuit altitude and where I would turn and descend on base.
We are not talking about straight-in DIY IAP, this is only about NAA IAP with IFR circling (while operating under IFR all the time untill the aircraft reaches the apron after landing or the hold after the missed), which countries would allow one to go out of the protected area or bellow the circling height?
Before descent to touchdown,
- UK, allows it for straight-in MDH before recovering to circle MDH at MAPT (also on “bad weather circuit” after IFR takeoff for IMCR holders but let’s forget about this one as we only talk about NAA IAP landings here)
- France, could allow this for IAP without ATS
- US, prohibited with/without ATS (NYCYankee,
and also no CTL on “ILS/LPV only”)
On descent to touchdown, I think there are a set of conditions but no exact answer…
Are people mixing up DIY approaches (which are normally straight-in and off topic for this thread) with DIY circling approaches (which is a slightly crazy thing to be doing below the published circling height, and which belong here)?
Half this stuff makes no sense to me.
Ah, you think VFR circuit is south? I am confused?
VFR circuit at LeTouquet is north, I had the impression it’s clear in VFR VAC chart, or probably I mis-read this and it’s actually South?
If VFR circuit at L2K is south then no problem doing IFR CTL at 550ft MDH and joining the VFR circuit to land on RWY13 while staying always in the south side, I will check next time when ATC around if overflying Macron house in the south at 550ft agl is allowed on downwind for VFR circuit…
@gallois are you aware of the high obstacles north, it’s 812ft agl way above the 550ft MDH? can I ask a simple question: assume you are in the planning phase, QNH will be given by Lille, what is lowest cloud ceiling you want to see in TAF at ETA to fly ILS13 to LeTouquet without ATS?
500ft agl? 550ft agl? 812ft agl? 1000ft agl? 1500ft agl?
It’s a really simple questionif planning, it has nothing to do with personal PIC choices, my answer would be 550ft agl but I will stay away from the 812ft agl turbines and obstacles (serious question do they generate wake turbulence?)
I have flown it in Mooney without much currency in the “circling business”, I decided to pull a safe one over water at 700ft agl (I am really not brave to try it over land): visibility was great and ceiling was bellow 1000ft, I think I will need lot of practice to try both South & North one day at 550ft agl with ceiling at 600ft agl…
@Malibuflyer you need to read whatbI actually wrote. I wrote that you have a choice you could cancel IFR and make a standard VFR approach using the VAC chart and the circuit marked on that. But as there is no ATS you 8would have to integrate via the vertical at a minimum of 500’ or more above circuit altitude.
You mentioned yourself that CTL is part of an IFR procedure but it requires visual references and “see and avoid” rules the day.
Why Ibra would go north and hit a wind turbine when the plate says it is not allowed is what I don’t understand.
I also don’t understand why descending is such a problem to you. You fly the circuit at circuit to land altitude, there are laws governing obstacles on final and within the circuit even on a VFR only field, or there certainly are in France. So in an MVL you are flying at an altitude at or above the circle to land without ATC, in Ibras example that is 570ft or 550ft MDH you have a minimum of 1500m visibility. The highest obstacle in an area that even a jumbo jet would fly a circuit at is 171 ft therefore you have a minimum obstacle clearance of 379 ft .
If you were flying a VFR circuit and you arrive on base at 570ft or 550ft AGL where would you start the descent to land. You are PIC its your decision nobody elses. And as a good PIC you will have studied the plates beforehand. You will have noted if you are now intending to land on runway 31 that this 171 ft obstacle will be around 1km to your left as you descend on final and of course with 1500metres visibility you will be able to see that. You will also know that in passing abeam that obstacle, if you are aiming to cross the runway threshold at 50ft you will be at around 200ft. I think all this should be well within the capabilities of any PPL let alone one with an IR given the visibility. If not they could always circle higher and land a bit further along the runway. Le Touquet has an LDA of 1700m.
I don’t understand what Ibra is arguing in the final para.
