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

[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.

 

[waveflyer]

Human beings on the other headset fellas-

That doesn't bug me bc I have every backup loaded I can have-
What gets me is being asked if I have the field, then get a 10 mile base turn 3 minutes later-
Biggest thing I liked about Oakland is that it's small and ATC trusts us- I've seen 5 get cleared for the visual 20 miles out and we clicked off 3 mile separation-
Don't forget that it's us doing things different that usually gets us the micromanaged treatment- It's why most of us cringe when ATC gives us the green light and the "by the book", clueless unaware toolbag screws it up.