Except we didn't give on the double/day/night transition.
Then how did you operate the flight? ILN-SFO is daytime, SFO-LAX-JFK is night, and JFK-ILN is daytime again. That's two day/night transitions.
We operated it, for a while, without two day/night transitions by having the ILN-SFO crew return on a SFO-ILN day flight. The SFO-LAX-JFK legs were flown by a crew that had flight ILN-SFO on the night system. The arriving JFK on the SFO-LAX-JFK legs would limo to EWR and fly a night EWR-ILN flight. Lastly, the JFK-ILN trip was flown by yet another crew but I don't remember where they came from. In any case, none of the crews had a double day/night transitions but the trips were not very good, short layovers, etc., which was a lot more fatiguing than doing the full transcon. In the end it was a better trip for the crews (from a rest perspective) to waive the double day/night transition restriction as that restriction was intended to protect against a very different kind of schedule.
And have the tower refuse my request for a visual approach to 22L. And 22R was visible the whole way down the chute as well.
A couple of issues here...
1. The tower can't issue a visual approach clearance. That is done by Dayton approach. They'd have to relay the request to Dayton on the phone and get it from them.
2. Doesn't matter if you can see the runway if the airport's prevailing visibility or reported ceiling is below VFR minimums. Without the required reported visibility Dayton can not issue a visual approach clearance per 7110.65
7-4-3 b.
3. Dayton can not provide vectors to a visual approach unless the reported ceiling is at least 500' above the
MVA/MIA per 7110.65 7-4-2.
I've seen a number of instances of shallow fog (MIFG) where the runway is clearly visible from the air but the surface visibility, and RVR readings, are well below minimums. I've held at both FSD and SGF with the runway plainly in sight waiting for the reported vis to improve to minimums. When it did, the runway is clear right up to the point that you enter the fog in the flare and the runway environment suddenly (nearly) disappears.
Some of it perhaps is them having to deal with not having their own approach/departure control and having to coordinate that with DAY.
You can thank the FAA for that. Many years ago, Airborne Express (ABF) paid for the radar site at the ILN airport. Prior to that installation it was non-radar procedures in/out of ILN. i.e. wait for the preceding landing to cancel or hold for release until the preceding departure was in RADAR contact. ABF paid for the remote RADAR installation and feed to Dayton so that they'd have proper RADAR coverage down to the ground but the FAA wouldn't allow the certification of the BRITE RADAR displays in the ILN tower because the tower controllers were not FAA employees (they were ABF employees). This meant that the ILN tower was just a "VFR" tower that couldn't provide IFR separation except through the procedures specified in their letters of agreement with Dayton. This allowed them to launch departures at the specified intervals, give canned clearances in the case of a missed approach, etc., but they couldn't do what any normal FAA tower could do.
I think that they were eventually able to get the BRITE certified but the FAA still doesn't let them do all of the things that an FAA tower would be allowed to do with the level of equipment that they have.
Some of it perhaps is them having to deal with not having their own approach/departure control and having to coordinate that with DAY. Who knows. It's beyond frustrating.
