Missed Approach from a circle to land

[Duke of Ale]

Where can I find what the missed approach procedure is when you miss on a circling approach?

Example: At KIND, cleared for ILS 32 circle 23R. You line up with 23R and for some reason you have to miss.

I have always been taught that you do the missed approach procedure for the ILS32.

I have done a search here and come up with nothing so I would like some help please.

Thanks

 

[Flightsafety]

http://www.faa.gov/atpubs/AIM/Chap5/aim0504.html#5-4-19

5-4-19. Missed Approach

c. If visual reference is lost while circling-to-land from an instrument approach, the missed approach specified for that particular procedure must be followed (unless an alternate missed approach procedure is specified by ATC). To become established on the prescribed missed approach course, the pilot should make an initial climbing turn toward the landing runway and continue the turn until established on the missed approach course. Inasmuch as the circling maneuver may be accomplished in more than one direction, different patterns will be required to become established on the prescribed missed approach course, depending on the aircraft position at the time visual reference is lost. Adherence to the procedure will assure that an aircraft will remain within the circling and missed approach obstruction clearance areas. (See FIG 5-4-20.)

 

[midlifeflyer]

Re: Missed Approach from a circle to lan

Where can I find what the missed approach procedure is when you miss on a circling approach?

Example: At KIND, cleared for ILS 32 circle 23R. You line up with 23R and for some reason you have to miss.

I have always been taught that you do the missed approach procedure for the ILS32.

I'm not sure I understand your question.

You are cleared for the ILS 32.

Rather than a straight in, you clearance specifies that you are to circle to land on runway 23R.

Your IAF, FAF, MDA, MAP, altitudes, minimums, frequencies, headings, timings, applicable notes, etc, etc, etc are all on the ILS 32 chart.

What makes you think that the missed approach procedure on the chart =doesn't= apply? (unless ATC advises differently, of course)

The procedure for getting into the procedure is the one Flightsafety described.

 

[midlifeflyer]

Re: Re: Re: Missed Approach from a circl

Cause following the straight-in missed approach procedure while circling to a different runway could leave you as a greasy spot on adjacent terrain.

Guess you missed the part of my reply that said
==============================
The procedure for getting into the procedure is the one Flightsafety described.
==============================
..and which you just repeated.

Reading is fundamental.

 

[avbug]

Cause following the straight-in missed approach procedure while circling to a different runway could leave you as a greasy spot on adjacent terrain.

No, it won't. Failing to follow the missed approach proceedure could do that to you, but following it will NOT.

A missed approach proceedure is not merely for a straight in approach. If circling minimums are applied, then the missed approach proceedure applies to circling, too. Are you not familiar with circling obstacle clearance criteria?

Circling obstacle clearance criteria does not account for attempting to circle below the circling altitude. However, the reason that circling minimums are higher than straight in minimums is to account for circling while staying within the circling approach area radii while maintaining obstacle clearance. If one executes the missed approach within these radii, one has obstacle clearance so long as one remains at or above the circling minimums and executes the missed approach from this position.

One is to continue in a climbing turn in the direction of the circling maneuver, until established on the missed approach course.

If terrain or obstacle protection is an issue, the missed approach will be modified or have specific instructions. Commonly, one may be told not to circle left, or right. This may be for missed approach proceedure purposes, or for obstacles, or noise abatement. The purpose is really not relevant. If the proceedure gives certain provisions, these must be adhered to.

If you are flying a given approach, you execute the missed approach for that proceedure, and no other.

Most missed approach procedures have an initial turn that is away from the highest terrain.

Not necessarily. What would make you think that?

Doing the prescribed turn during a miss from a circling approach could result in the airplane flying into the highest terrain.

Not if you're following the missed approach proceedure. Why do you suppose a missed approach proceedure is published? To kill pilots less sharp than yourself, or perhaps just to ensure terrain and obstacle clearance while providing an order to flight operations?

After getting enough altitude to clear terrain, intercept and follow the straight-in missed approach procedure for the approach flown. (ILS 32 in this case).

What's this fixation you have with a "straight-in missed approach proceedure?" How many approaches have you flown that have separate missed approach proceedures for a straight-in, vs. one for circling? It's a missed approach proceedure, not a "straight-in missed approach proceedure. The published missed approach proceedure applies regardless of weather one is landing straight-in, or circling, unless instructions are published to the contrary.

 

[avbug]

Lessee...what is it that you think you're saying here, oh bemused one? You have it all figured out. Don't get too lippy and full of yourself yet, because you obviously don't have a clue what you're talking about.

And, you might want to share your vast knowledge of TERPs criteria with the folks who write the AIM.

Alrighty then! Where to begin? You believe that the AIM supercedes any instrument approach proceedure, do you? You do understand that the AIM is not regulatory, whereas any instrument approach proceedure IS regulatory, don't you?

Wherein did I contradict anything in the AIM, kiddo? Got any references to that? The AIM very clearly states that when executing a missed approach when circling, you must continue circling toward the landing runway and continue the turn until established on the missed approach course. There isn't a missed approach course for straight-in vs. one for circling. You are flying the missed approach proceedure, period. How you become established varies, but it's the same proceedure. You do understand this, don't you?

The AIM states that you will fly the missed approach proceedure for the SIAP in use. This is what I stated one should do. The AIM stipulates that one will continue circling toward the runway until established on the missed approach course. I said the same thing...one must continue in a climbing turn in the direction of the turn (one will be circling toward the runway...only an idiot turns away from the runway to circle...) until established on the missed approach course.

The same missed approach course, I must add, that applies to the straight-in approach. Do you not understand that?

I believe midlifeflyer hit the nail on the head when he noted reading is fundamental. You should give it a try some time.

Where can I find what the missed approach procedure is when you miss on a circling approach?

AIM 5-4-19. For the specific missed approach proceedure, visit the proceedure you're flying. You fly the published missed approach procedure for the standard instrument approach proceedure you're flying, and no other. Period.

 

[cvsfly]

Lessee...what is it that you think you're saying here, oh bemused one? You have it all figured out. Don't get too lippy and full of yourself yet, because you obviously don't have a clue what you're talking about.



Alrighty then! Where to begin? You believe that the AIM supercedes any instrument approach proceedure, do you? You do understand that the AIM is not regulatory, whereas any instrument approach proceedure IS regulatory, don't you?

Wherein did I contradict anything in the AIM, kiddo? Got any references to that? The AIM very clearly states that when executing a missed approach when circling, you must continue circling toward the landing runway and continue the turn until established on the missed approach course. There isn't a missed approach course for straight-in vs. one for circling. You are flying the missed approach proceedure, period. How you become established varies, but it's the same proceedure. You do understand this, don't you?

The AIM states that you will fly the missed approach proceedure for the SIAP in use. This is what I stated one should do. The AIM stipulates that one will continue circling toward the runway until established on the missed approach course. I said the same thing...one must continue in a climbing turn in the direction of the turn (one will be circling toward the runway...only an idiot turns away from the runway to circle...) until established on the missed approach course.

The same missed approach course, I must add, that applies to the straight-in approach. Do you not understand that?

I believe midlifeflyer hit the nail on the head when he noted reading is fundamental. You should give it a try some time.



AIM 5-4-19. For the specific missed approach proceedure, visit the proceedure you're flying. You fly the published missed approach procedure for the standard instrument approach proceedure you're flying, and no other. Period.

 

[cvsfly]

Sorry my computer is locking up - trying again.

.... The AIM very clearly states that when executing a missed approach when circling, you must continue circling toward the landing runway and continue the turn until established on the missed approach course. There isn't a missed approach course for straight-in vs. one for circling. You are flying the missed approach proceedure, period. How you become established varies, but it's the same proceedure. You do understand this, don't you?

The AIM states that you will fly the missed approach proceedure for the SIAP in use. This is what I stated one should do. The AIM stipulates that one will continue circling toward the runway until established on the missed approach course. I said the same thing...one must continue in a climbing turn in the direction of the turn (one will be circling toward the runway...only an idiot turns away from the runway to circle...) until established on the missed approach course.

The same missed approach course, I must add, that applies to the straight-in approach. .....

AIM 5-4-19. For the specific missed approach proceedure, visit the proceedure you're flying. You fly the published missed approach procedure for the standard instrument approach proceedure you're flying, and no other. Period.

Sounds pretty clear to me. Perhaps the original poster is coming from an airline enviroment that prohibits circling and is now in the corporate world with no such restrictions. The initial confusion on circling is understandable and may give all of us a moment to refresh on the subject. If you are operating with out clear company/training guidelines for circling and are a little rusty, don't do them. At least set some personal limitations as to when and where. Consider unfamiliar airport, high terrain, low time in type, night, etc. Fly safe - and get along!

 

[transpac]

Not sure what the argument is after avbug's most recent post. Along with being insulting as usual, he now agrees that the first turn on a miss should be toward the landing runway instead of following the published initial stages of the missed approach procedure. That's 100% in agreement with both the AIM and my earlier posts.

 

[avbug]

No, Transpac, that's incorrect. My posts have been accurate and consistant; your failure to read and comprehend hasn't changed that. If you find that insulting, it's only because it's fact.

Here's a fact. To quote you:

Cause following the straight-in missed approach procedure while circling to a different runway could leave you as a greasy spot on adjacent terrain.

You are 100% incorrect. That response was provided by you when Midlifeflyer asked you why you thought a missed approach proceedure wouldn't apply.

You incorrectly suggested that there is such a thing as a straight-in missed approach proceedure, suggesting that a different proceedure applies when circling. It does not.

However, when circling, one must take into account where one is in relation to the missed approach course. If one is circling left to a runway and the missed approach proceedure called for a right turn initially, of course one wouldn't turn right...because that's not part of the proceedure when engaging in a circle-to-land.

There is one proceedure. How one becomes established is dependent upon where one is at the time of the execution of the missed approach.

The next time you miss on a circle, go ahead and make that immediate right turn the straight in miss calls for. I just hope you're solo and not in a valuable airplane.

Don't be an idiot.

That's 100% in agreement with both the AIM and my earlier posts.

Possibly so, but unimportant and relevant, as the approach proceedure in question is regulatory and mandatory, whereas the AIM is not.

 

[avbug]

I've wasted enough time already.

Indeed you have, brightspark. The first and most important step is recognition. Only then can you begin to get help.

except for approaches that have no straight in procedure, all missed approach procedures commence at the straight in missed approach point.

Negative. They do not. The missed approach proceedure commences during circling at such time as one elects to go missed. Seldom (if ever) does one return to the published MAP to execute the missed approach proceedure. When one initiates the missed approach during circling, one has begun the missed approach proceedure, and it does not begin at the published MAP.

Further, one may commence the missed approach below circling minimums when approaching straight in, but may make no turns until the MAP.

When one is circling at elects to go missed, one begins a climbing turn in the direction of the landing runway, and continues that turn until established on the missed approach course. One is has already commenced the missed approach proceedure, prior to becoming established on the missed approach course, and surprise, surprise! It hasn't started at the published MAP! Imagine that!

You've made many derisive comments,...

Yes, indeedy. I quoted YOU!

You don't know me, ...

Right. Don't want to, either. Your postings seem to indicate that your eyes are too close together, and I do not associate with people whose eyes are too close together. (One reason I will never meet President Bush. Aside from the fact that he bears close physical resemblence to a Reese monkey).

...so I'm not putting a lot of stock in your expressed opinion of my intellect.

I wouldn't, either. You're challenged enough as it is. Have a nice day, yourself, and do try to avoid spotting the hillsides with grease. Somebody, afterall, has to clean it up. Thanks for playing, and try not to let the door slap your backside on the way out.

 

[boxcar]

Forget to take your meds Mikey?

 

[avbug]

No. George Bush really does resemble a monkey, and his eyes really are too close together. I'm not making it up.

 

[prpjt]

George Bush really does resemble a monkey, and his eyes really are too close together. I'm not making it up.

Avbug, you generally speak rather highly of monkeys. Or is it just some monkeys. What are you, some kind of monkey bigot?

 

[avbug]

You're right. That's unfair to monkeys.

It's not their fault that they're related to George Dububya...

I suppose they should be proud that one of their kind finally made it to public office.

 

[KigAir]

No. George Bush really does resemble a monkey, and his eyes really are too close together. I'm not making it up.

Monkeys also fling poo.

 

[redd]

You're right. That's unfair to monkeys.

It's not their fault that they're related to George Dububya...

I suppose they should be proud that one of their kind finally made it to public office.

Avbug,

Do you really feel that way?

Didn’t you state in a previous thread about being marooned on a deserted island:

At length the silent prayer of the heart would be answered, and as if sent from heaven, a small monkey would crawl from a palm tree and present itself as a gift from God; a pet, a friend, a companion. A child, something to nurture, to comfort, to talk to. I would feed it, care for it, name it (anything but wilson).

Then one day, without warning, it would bite me, a little too hard. I would swing it by the tail, snapping it's little neck before tossing it's lifeless little body onto the reef made of Mother's aluminum rubbing compound cans. It would sit there in the sun, it's little monkey eyes plucked out by seagulls, and it's rotting hairy body picked apart by unknowning crabs.

I think you truly harbor deep resentments toward monkeys. In fact you are monkaphobic, and bear deep-seated hostility toward our lovable furry creature friends.

 

[Denizen]

I don't know what Avbug has against monkeys...but they are tasty grilled on a old radiatior grill oven an open fire after having had a few<too many> San Miguel beers.

 

[avbug]

Monkaphobic might be a bit harsh. At least I haven't resorted to tying them to barb wire fences in Wyoming, yet.

Monkeys are useful for much more than food and paleontological comparison. They are God's critters; a touch inspiration breathed into the animal world, filled with animation and joy. They brighten the eyes of the three year old, they facinate the eighty year old, the capture the imagination of scientists, tourists, and the world.

They make a great flexible tailgate in a 1975 Ford when tied off spread-eagled to both sides, in a pinch. Zip ties work best; they can unpick the knots on rope.

 

[redd]

But wait, there's more...

"It's not only a dessert topping, it's also a floor wax!"

I also hear that live, warm, monkey brains are a delicacy in Africa, they even have special tables with a hole in the center and clamps to hold the monkey head.

Could be Urban Legend though...


Another Urban Legend is that AID's got started from the love that dare not speak its name between man and monkey....maybe the joy and facination of God's cuddly little critters got to be too much for some.

For some, monkeys encourage illicit thoughts, kind of like sheep that way, I guess.

 

[midlifeflyer]

No. George Bush really does resemble a monkey, and his eyes really are too close together. I'm not making it up.

There is an entire website dedicated to the resemblance:

http://www.smirkingchimp.com/

WARNING: Ultra-liberal webside ahead!

 

[Duke of Ale]

Thanks guys.
What I was looking for was some reference as to what to do in the situation I described. It is described in the AIM as "Flightsafety" pointed out.

Yes, I am an airline type retired, now flying for a fractional. Still learning!!!!!!!!

 

[THE Flying Ace]

Maybe Avbug is bitter towards monkeys because his mom is one!

 

[100LL... Again!]

I'd rather have a monkey with SAT scores of 1200 (back when that actually meant something), than a Lurch impersonator who makes his living gold-diggin wealthy women.

John "I don't fall, that Sonafab***** knocked me over" Kerry.

Bush's detrators keep harping about Bush's "stupidity". Yet he keeps outwitting them. Now THAT'S STUPID!

 

[avbug]

I wanted Jesse Ventura for president.

 

[Crizz]

NO, you didnt.

 

[avbug]

Yes I did. Aside from being a good choice, I would have bought the bumpersticker that said "My President can beat up your Prime Minister."