WTF!! Why give me a Visual and expect me to intercept the LOC?

[scoreboardII]

I think it's valid the OP bring to light a "cleared visual" then get hammered with "but, stay above such and such, on this heading to LOC final and keep 170 to 5nm".

 

[humveedriver]

I think it's valid the OP bring to light a "cleared visual" then get hammered with "but, stay above such and such, on this heading to LOC final and keep 170 to 5nm".

It's all about stuffing 11 pounds of potatoes in a 10 pound bag. That and noise abatement.

 

[LearLove]

That and noise abatement.

When I hear "noise abatement" I think back to my childhood school days when the teacher would assign pages to read for homework - like your really going to care about it or actually do it - its just not an issue.

Hey Canada, close in takeoff my a$$ - max blast all the way.

O and for the rich people out in Quincy Mass - just delay that turn to 140 for a few extra seconds and remind them that these "noisy jets" bring billions of $ in business to their city every year without which it would crumble back into Puritan farmland and witch dunking trials.

 

[dirkdigler]

I hate this. Its happening more and more. ATIS and Approach say Expect a Visual and then give you some fix on a LOC that is crammed in the middle of all the other approaches in the FMS in MIA. 8L ... why not just give the LOC approach and leave it at that?

My guess is that they are just tossing the aircraft separation responsibility in your lap so they don't have to do IFR separation minimum.... But I know what you're saying..

 

[CAMELBUB]

Get over yourselves guys....don't get your panties in a wad..just fly the jet!

 

[drinksonme]

Just to throw a curve...EWR will report, issue, and expect everyone to perform visual approaches to keep seperation to minimum when they can...yet if you go-around they will tell you fly published missed approach. Just happened to me. Cleared visual...no mention in ATIS nor clearance about LOC or ILS...They called a go-around on us because they miss judged separation between us and traffic landing on a intersecting RWY...then they told us fly published missed approach. What?.....We were backing up with LOC so no issue, but how can they do that. Two totally different clearances under FAR's.

 

[CesnaCaptn]

Just to throw a curve...EWR will report, issue, and expect everyone to perform visual approaches to keep seperation to minimum when they can...yet if you go-around they will tell you fly published missed approach. Just happened to me. Cleared visual...no mention in ATIS nor clearance about LOC or ILS...They called a go-around on us because they miss judged separation between us and traffic landing on a intersecting RWY...then they told us fly published missed approach. What?.....We were backing up with LOC so no issue, but how can they do that. Two totally different clearances under FAR's.

That's a bad clearence. I'd consider filing an ASAP. Most operations manuals that I'm aware of require an underlying nav aid to be tuned, but charter visuals are the only visuals that can have a "published missed."

 

[Fly4$]

Just my 2c. In my opinion, when they clear you for a visual, the separation mins are reduced for a reason. Because your heads need to be looking outside, not at the FMS. Screw ATC! I totally agree with the original poster. ATC connot have it both ways.

 

[scoreboardII]

Just to throw a curve...EWR will report, issue, and expect everyone to perform visual approaches to keep seperation to minimum when they can...yet if you go-around they will tell you fly published missed approach. Just happened to me. Cleared visual...no mention in ATIS nor clearance about LOC or ILS...They called a go-around on us because they miss judged separation between us and traffic landing on a intersecting RWY...then they told us fly published missed approach. What?.....We were backing up with LOC so no issue, but how can they do that. Two totally different clearances under FAR's.

Call their bluff, there is no published missed on a visual, stay in the pattern and stay with tower start a turn to downwind.

 

[CA1900]

Call their bluff, there is no published missed on a visual, stay in the pattern and stay with tower start a turn to downwind.

At Newark?

Please don't do that. Straight out until you have some clarification is one thing. A turn to downwind, at a busy airport using intersecting runways, is a really bad idea.