ATF Procedures

[fleet16b]

There is no 602.96 section 2 para c...

My mistake , sorry
sec 3 para c

[AuxBatOn]

So, " make all turns to the left when operating within the aerodrome traffic circuit, except where right turns are specified by the Minister in the Canada Flight Supplement or where otherwise authorized by the appropriate air traffic control unit;"

How does that mean you cannot join straight-in? This would also mean all IFR traffic is in violation of 602.96(3)(c) since 602.96 (1) says: "This section applies to persons operating VFR or IFR aircraft at or in the vicinity of an uncontrolled or controlled aerodrome." when they complete a straight-in approach.

[fleet16b]

So, " make all turns to the left when operating within the aerodrome traffic circuit, except where right turns are specified by the Minister in the Canada Flight Supplement or where otherwise authorized by the appropriate air traffic control unit;"

How does that mean you cannot join straight-in? This would also mean all IFR traffic is in violation of 602.96(3)(c) since 602.96 (1) says: "This section applies to persons operating VFR or IFR aircraft at or in the vicinity of an uncontrolled or controlled aerodrome." when they complete a straight-in approach.

I have been flying 30 yrs and cannot remember this not being the rule.
It pertains specifically to ATF Aerodromes , at MF aerodrome a straight in final can be done
According to TC , straight in final is a HUGE no no at an ATF Aerodrome due to the fact that you have NORDO aircraft operating in the circuit. My impression from our talk was that a straight in final is considered more of an invasion of the airspace as one has not established an expected circuit pattern for aircraft that have no radio . Straight in , you just show up out of nowhere so to speak while others are in the pattern. If they are NORDO , you may not see them , Essentially , you are butting into the circuit
If you are unclear or do not feel you need to comply , I would speak with TC as I did.

[AuxBatOn]

How about an IFR airplane shooting an approach?

[Rookie50]

How about an IFR airplane shooting an approach?

Suppose the wording could be read, if you're shooting the actual approach, there is unlikely to be others in the pattern (and especially NORDO) at an ATF. Suppose it's possible.

There are some I know that will do a practice approach on a busy Sunday to an ATF, long straight in final. This is not a wise idea in my view and I don't do it. Too easy to have confusion about where everyone is, never mind NORDO

[AuxBatOn]

Even if there is nobody in the circuit, this dude is saying you cannot conduct a straight-in final. This include IFR traffic (as 602.92(1) says), because of 602.96(3)(c). I call BS. It may be very poor airmanship to do so, but it is not against the law.

[fleet16b]

Even if there is nobody in the circuit, this dude is saying you cannot conduct a straight-in final. This include IFR traffic (as 602.92(1) says), because of 602.96(3)(c). I call BS. It may be very poor airmanship to do so, but it is not against the law.

Well unfortunately, as per the CAR it is law and can result in enforcement /fine

As per your quote , you do not know if anyone else is in or joining the circuit with 100% certainty because they may be
NORDO and you cant see everything with 100% certainty either
That's where they are coming from

[AuxBatOn]

It is not explicitly written that you cannot conduct a straght-in approach therefore, at this point, is merely an interpretation of the law that, IMO, is a bit stretched. Until a Court is presented with a case and makes a ruling, it will remain interpretation. If that was the case, every IFR traffic conducting a straight-in approach at an ATF would go against the law. Tell that to the 703/704 companies that operate to ATFs....

FWIW, the CARs do not differentiate between ATF, MF or controlled aerodrome in 602.96.

[fleet16b]

It is not explicitly written that you cannot conduct a straght-in approach therefore, at this point, is merely an interpretation of the law that, IMO, is a bit stretched. Until a Court is presented with a case and makes a ruling, it will remain interpretation. If that was the case, every IFR traffic conducting a straight-in approach at an ATF would go against the law. Tell that to the 703/704 companies that operate to ATFs....

FWIW, the CARs do not differentiate between ATF, MF or controlled aerodrome in 602.96.

Good points
The only place I can see it specified is here in the bottom left corner highlighted in blue http://www.tc.gc.ca/PUBLICATIONS/EN/TP1 ... 11541E.pdf.
It shows straight in finals are allowed at IFR equipped MF Aerodromes only .
But then again this diagram is not considered a CAR but there is a CAR notation at the bottom

[CpnCrunch]

If you're doing an IFR circling procedure, you can circle the opposite way to the circuit pattern if circling is prohibited in the other direction. Whether or not you're actually in the "circuit" (as you'll probably be lower than the standard circuit) is another question. I certainly wouldn't recommend circling in the opposite direction to the circuit on a VFR day when there is VFR traffic in the circuit, although I've seen people do that.

What if you're landing a 737 at an uncontrolled airport? Are you going to do a circuit? Even if there is other traffic, it doesn't seem like the smartest idea. Or what about Hedley and his L-39? He says he does a 1500ft circuit to avoid blasting the spam cans out of the sky.

[fleet16b]

If you're doing an IFR circling procedure, you can circle the opposite way to the circuit pattern if circling is prohibited in the other direction. Whether or not you're actually in the "circuit" (as you'll probably be lower than the standard circuit) is another question. I certainly wouldn't recommend circling in the opposite direction to the circuit on a VFR day when there is VFR traffic in the circuit, although I've seen people do that.

What if you're landing a 737 at an uncontrolled airport? Are you going to do a circuit? Even if there is other traffic, it doesn't seem like the smartest idea. Or what about Hedley and his L-39? He says he does a 1500ft circuit to avoid blasting the spam cans out of the sky.

Again, good points but again TC is saying no straight in allowed at ATF Aerodromes but you can do them at MF Aerodromes
FYI there are no official circuit heights at MF / ATF Aerodromes only recommended heights
You can fly 100ft VFR circuits till your hearts content not good practice but totally allowed

[ahramin]

If you're doing an IFR circling procedure, you can circle the opposite way to the circuit pattern if circling is prohibited in the other direction. Whether or not you're actually in the "circuit" (as you'll probably be lower than the standard circuit) is another question. I certainly wouldn't recommend circling in the opposite direction to the circuit on a VFR day when there is VFR traffic in the circuit, although I've seen people do that.

What if you're landing a 737 at an uncontrolled airport? Are you going to do a circuit? Even if there is other traffic, it doesn't seem like the smartest idea. Or what about Hedley and his L-39? He says he does a 1500ft circuit to avoid blasting the spam cans out of the sky.

Again, good points but again TC is saying no straight in allowed at ATF Aerodromes but you can do them at MF Aerodromes
FYI there are no official circuit heights at MF / ATF Aerodromes only recommended heights
You can fly 100ft VFR circuits till your hearts content not good practice but totally allowed

Fleet I have a letter somewhere around here from TC Enforcement - the people who would actually charge you with something - that says a straight in is permissible anywhere as it avoids the circuit. I'll see if I can dig it out.

You can't take the opinion of one inspector and then say "TC is saying". You have to look up the rules, present your interpretation of them to multiple enforcement people at TC and compare the different answers. To me it's very obvious that many TC inspectors say you can't do a straight in at ATF Aerodromes, and just as obvious that if you do a straight in and don't cut anyone off, you are avoiding the circuit and not breaking any CARs.

[photofly]

You can fly 100ft VFR circuits till your hearts content not good practice but totally allowed

Be careful. Watch out for 602.114(d)(ii). Then we can discuss if the downwind part of a circuit is either "taking off" or "landing".

[Kitzbuhel]

I don't understand why all the fuss and strange interpretations. When you shoot an approach, Rnav or otherwise you typically end up about 10 miles final. If it's VFR outside just keep your eyes open... I doubt that all IFR traffic into ATFs are breaking the rules.

[JohnnyHotRocks]

I have just spent the last hour researching this topic and cannot find guidance anywhere that requires an aircraft on an IFR approach (in vmc) to join the circuit. In fact the TC poster I found cautions VFR pilots that IFR aircraft may be landing from a straight in approach.

[Big Pistons Forever]

I have just spent the last hour researching this topic and cannot find guidance anywhere that requires an aircraft on an IFR approach (in vmc) to join the circuit. In fact the TC poster I found cautions VFR pilots that IFR aircraft may be landing from a straight in approach.

To meet the requirements of 604.28(a) you may be required to fly a circuit.

[JohnnyHotRocks]

May be required or are required?

[AuxBatOn]

So, 604.28 is restricted to 604 operators and does not apply to 703/4/5 or non-commercial flying...

[JohnnyHotRocks]

604.28 does not say that you have to join the vfr circuit

[fleet16b]

If you're doing an IFR circling procedure, you can circle the opposite way to the circuit pattern if circling is prohibited in the other direction. Whether or not you're actually in the "circuit" (as you'll probably be lower than the standard circuit) is another question. I certainly wouldn't recommend circling in the opposite direction to the circuit on a VFR day when there is VFR traffic in the circuit, although I've seen people do that.

What if you're landing a 737 at an uncontrolled airport? Are you going to do a circuit? Even if there is other traffic, it doesn't seem like the smartest idea. Or what about Hedley and his L-39? He says he does a 1500ft circuit to avoid blasting the spam cans out of the sky.

Again, good points but again TC is saying no straight in allowed at ATF Aerodromes but you can do them at MF Aerodromes
FYI there are no official circuit heights at MF / ATF Aerodromes only recommended heights
You can fly 100ft VFR circuits till your hearts content not good practice but totally allowed

Fleet I have a letter somewhere around here from TC Enforcement - the people who would actually charge you with something - that says a straight in is permissible anywhere as it avoids the circuit. I'll see if I can dig it out.

You can't take the opinion of one inspector and then say "TC is saying". You have to look up the rules, present your interpretation of them to multiple enforcement people at TC and compare the different answers. To me it's very obvious that many TC inspectors say you can't do a straight in at ATF Aerodromes, and just as obvious that if you do a straight in and don't cut anyone off, you are avoiding the circuit and not breaking any CARs.

I did not take the opinion of one TC Inspector and sought out a second inspector to see if there was any conflicting interpretations.
Both had the same opinion that straight in approaches are illegal at ATF aerodromes. Note : do not get things confused with MF aerodromes , you can do straight in there .
Doing a straight in is not avoiding the circuit as final is a leg of the circuit which means you are joining against the procedure TC enforces
The big confusion is the interpretation 602.96 and the MF/ATF Poster

[fleet16b]

I have just spent the last hour researching this topic and cannot find guidance anywhere that requires an aircraft on an IFR approach (in vmc) to join the circuit. In fact the TC poster I found cautions VFR pilots that IFR aircraft may be landing from a straight in approach.

The TC Poster states that you must join the circuit at ATF Aerodromes by either straight in downwind or mid downwind.
The confusion lies around the fact that the poster is a suggested procedure NOT a CAR Regulation.

FROM THE POSTER:

"At non-MF aerodromes, or when MF
procedures are not invoked, keep a
sharp lookout. NORDO traffic may
also be established in, or be entering,
the circuit without other traffic or
the ground station being aware.
If the aerodrome is equipped
with an instrument approach,
IFR arrivals may also be landing via
straight‑in or circling procedures "

[AuxBatOn]

It does NOT say such things in CARs, therefore it is not law (and not enforceable). If someone issues an infraction on the basis you are suggesting and he takes TC to court over it, I strongly suspect the individual would win his case...

[JohnnyHotRocks]

Please quote the air reg that states IFR traffic must join the downwind of a visual circuit

[fleet16b]

Looking over the CAR , I suppose that the section I highlighted in red could be used to justify a straight in approach
TC is really very unclear about all this . On one hand you have the CAR which is the law. Then you have the suggest procedures in a TC issued poster pertaining to AIM etc ( many do not realize that AIM are not laws) then to top it all off you have individual TC Inspector opinions

602.96 (1) This section applies to persons operating VFR or IFR aircraft at or in the vicinity of an uncontrolled or controlled aerodrome.


(2) Before taking off from, landing at or otherwise operating an aircraft at an aerodrome, the pilot-in-command of the aircraft shall be satisfied that

(a) there is no likelihood of collision with another aircraft or a vehicle; and


(b) the aerodrome is suitable for the intended operation.



(3) The pilot-in-command of an aircraft operating at or in the vicinity of an aerodrome shall

(a) observe aerodrome traffic for the purpose of avoiding a collision;


(b) conform to or avoid the pattern of traffic formed by other aircraft in operation;


(c) make all turns to the left when operating within the aerodrome traffic circuit, except where right turns are specified by the Minister in the Canada Flight Supplement or where otherwise authorized by the appropriate air traffic control unit;


(d) where the aerodrome is an airport, comply with any airport operating restrictions specified by the Minister in the Canada Flight Supplement;


(e) where practicable, land and take off into the wind unless otherwise authorized by the appropriate air traffic control unit;


(f) maintain a continuous listening watch on the appropriate frequency for aerodrome control communications or, if this is not possible and an air traffic control unit is in operation at the aerodrome, keep a watch for such instructions as may be issued by visual means by the air traffic control unit; and


(g) where the aerodrome is a controlled aerodrome, obtain from the appropriate air traffic control unit, either by radio communication or by visual signal, clearance to taxi, take off from or land at the aerodrome.



(4) Unless otherwise authorized by the appropriate air traffic control unit, no pilot-in-command shall operate an aircraft at an altitude of less than 2,000 feet over an aerodrome except for the purpose of landing or taking off or if the aircraft is operated pursuant to subsection (5).

[fleet16b]

It does NOT say such things in CARs, therefore it is not law (and not enforceable). If someone issues an infraction on the basis you are suggesting and he takes TC to court over it, I strongly suspect the individual would win his case...

You are correct , its the AIM poster that states this .....sort of
I will correct my above statement