Visual Approach Vs. Canceling IFR ??

[digits_]

Well, then I'll join the "this doesn't make sense" side of things. The more you learn!

Still can't shake the feeling it is based on obstacles somehow, but I can't find a reference, it is probably a figment of my imagination.

[photofly]

Nothing makes sense.

Here's a document from the CAA consulting about moving the TA to 18000MSL in the UK:
https://publicapps.caa.co.uk/docs/33/CA ... titude.pdf

And here's another, from NATS, about standardizing the TA in parts of South East England at 3000, or 6000:
https://www.nats.aero/wp-content/upload ... tation.pdf

One wonders if the authors of the two documents ever talked to each other. (I haven't been able to check the dates.)

It kind-of makes Canada looked joined up, for once.

[fishface]

It’s like here we use “altimeter” with inHg. Then most of the world with “QNH” with hPa.
Then there’s Japan with “QNH” with inHg.
Then somewhere else with “altimeter” and hPa.
Oh yea and Russia who uses QFE haha

[thenoflyzone]

Tower controllers cannot take control of IFR aircraft that are not intending to land. Therefore IFR separation must be maintained the whole time, from both other arrivals and IFR departures. Its all about who has responsibility of control of the aircraft, the IFR unit or the tower.

Not necessarily.

5 words. Controller applied visual departure separation.

Your unit has to be approved to do it.

This basically means that between an IFR trainer on a planned missed approach and an IFR departure, a tower controller can apply visual separation instead of radar separation. You need to make sure that before you handoff the IFR trainer back to TCU, you have a form of non-visual separation. Vertical, 3 miles or the aircraft are on assigned tracks that diverge by 15 degrees or more.

[thenoflyzone]

From what I understand, they actually do. The flight levels start above the highes obstacle, with a safe margin, per country. That means that in flat countries like the Netherlands you have low transition altitudes. The highest mountains in Canada are around 17000 ft if I recall correctly, so add 1000 ft safety margin and you are at FL180. That does make it silly when flying in Saskatchewan, but it looks like they wanted to cover the whole country under one rule.

Huh? Mount Logan up in Yukon comes in at 19,500ft.

What about Switzerland, France or Italy, all of which have peaks nearing 16,000 ft and yet the transition altitude ranges from 5,000 ft in Nice to 7,000 ft. in Zurich.

[valleyboy]

Caribbean 2000 ft

[fishface]

Some transition altitudes aren’t the same even within the same country.

[Driving Comet]

Tower controllers cannot take control of IFR aircraft that are not intending to land. Therefore IFR separation must be maintained the whole time, from both other arrivals and IFR departures. Its all about who has responsibility of control of the aircraft, the IFR unit or the tower.

Not necessarily.

5 words. Controller applied visual departure separation.

Your unit has to be approved to do it.

This basically means that between an IFR trainer on a planned missed approach and an IFR departure, a tower controller can apply visual separation instead of radar separation. You need to make sure that before you handoff the IFR trainer back to TCU, you have a form of non-visual separation. Vertical, 3 miles or the aircraft are on assigned tracks that diverge by 15 degrees or more.

Yes yes there will always be caveats and local procedures that will happen airport to airport...thanks...

[A346Dude]

Tower controllers cannot take control of IFR aircraft that are not intending to land. Therefore IFR separation must be maintained the whole time, from both other arrivals and IFR departures. Its all about who has responsibility of control of the aircraft, the IFR unit or the tower.

Not necessarily.

5 words. Controller applied visual departure separation.

Your unit has to be approved to do it.

I wish we had it. I am allowed to depart an IFR in front of a 737 at 3 miles final, but I can't depart it in front of a IFR trainer barely inside the zone grounding 60. Some of the rules just don't make a ton of sense.

[thenoflyzone]

I wish we had it. I am allowed to depart an IFR in front of a 737 at 3 miles final, but I can't depart it in front of a IFR trainer barely inside the zone grounding 60. Some of the rules just don't make a ton of sense.

Where do you work? Honestly, if it's at anyone of Canada's busiest commercial airports, there is no reason why you shouldn't have the ability to carry out that procedure if necessary. You can even do it between 2 IFR departures. One of them doesn't need to be a trainer. So if you're a busy airport with some IFR training, the operational gain to be had is there, for both the trainer, and commercial traffic. Talk to your manager/unit procedure supervisor. If no one pushes for it, it will never happen.

We have it here at YUL. We don't have IFR trainers, but we use it between 2 IFR departures, especially when you are forced to leave a prop on runway heading because of conflicting traffic on the parallel runway. Saves time when you have 5 or 10 departures waiting to takeoff. (Pilot applied visual departures come in handy as well ! But that's a different story)

I'm not 100% sure, but I believe that YOW and YQB have the ability to do it as well (I used to work YQB/YOW TCU a few years ago, and remember something to that effect in our agreements with both towers). There is a lot of slow IFR training at both those airports, so the ability to release IFR departures when the trainer is inside 3 miles final is a definite plus for commercial traffic.

So if you work at an airport like YYC, YEG or YWG, I don't see why you shouldn't have access to that procedure as well.