Visual approach clearance to an airport without a control tower

[Termine]

I was trained that the following two statements are accurate:

1. An aircraft must report either the airport, the runway, or a preceeding-aircraft-to-follow in sight before being issued a visual approach clearance.
2. Aircraft arriving at an airport with an operational control tower are cleared for a visual approach to a specific runway. Aircraft arriving at an airport without an operational control tower are cleared for a visual approach to the airport in general.

But a careful reading of 7–4–3 does not actually support either statement. Both are implied but never spelled out in so many words.

Regarding statement #2, 7–4–3a says that even if an aircraft is being vectored for an instrument approach, a visual approach may be initiated if the pilot reports the airport or runway in sight (operational control tower) or the airport in sight (no operational control tower). There are two possible phraseologies listed:

CLEARED VISUAL APPROACH RUNWAY (number)

and

CLEARED VISUAL APPROACH TO (airport name)

. It certainly seems like the first phraseology should be used at a towered airport while the second should be used at an untowered airport, but this is not made clear and both versions are listed under 7–4–3b, not a.

Regarding statement #1, the most basic criterion for issuing a visual approach clearance is listed at 7–4–3c1: "The aircraft is number one in the approach sequence." That's the only requirement, for them to be number one. It doesn't say anything about the airport being in sight at all! 7–4–3c3 does mention the airport or runway being in sight in the context of there being a sequence, but if there is no sequence c1 applies instead of c3, and c1 doesn't require the airport to be in sight. And 7–4–3a from above isn't relevant if the aircraft was getting vectors for a visual approach from the start.
However there is a note at c2 (the aircraft reports only the preceding aircraft in sight) which specifically says "the pilot need not report the airport/runway in sight," which does imply—but again does not actually say—that they do need to report the airport/runway in sight otherwise.

I'm not claiming that we should be giving visual approach clearances without getting an "in sight" report, because obviously that's dumb. I'm wondering if other people see what I'm saying and if this is something that should be clarified in the .65, or if the statements above are so obvious that I should sit down and go play with my toys over in the corner.

 

[ebk2992]

Obviously

did you read the thread? that was the whole point. not so dank vectorz on that one bro

 

[32andBelow]

I think with stuff like this is always helps to read the AIM too. It fills in a lot of the why of our rules

 

[Termine]

Okay, again, I understand what they're trying to say. But I really don't think I'm reading it wrong, I think it's written wrong. If you take out the "even when being vectored for a visual approach" bit the sentence is a grammatical mess because of the word "and" sitting in there. That means you have to keep the "even when being vectored for a visual approach" clause and that means the sentence, as it is written, does not apply to the scenario in which an aircraft is being vectored for a visual approach.

If it is the intention that the pilot has to report in sight (which I agree is most likely the actual intention) I would want it to be rewritten something like this:

a. Controllers may initiate, or pilots may request, a visual approach when the pilot reports:

1. The airport or the runway in sight at airports with operating control towers.
2. The airport in sight at airports without a control tower.

NOTE-
If the pilot reports the airport/runway in sight, a visual approach clearance may be issued even if the aircraft was being vectored for an instrument approach.

Still curious about whether you're allowed to issue a VA to a specific runway at an airport without a control tower. Again, the intention seems clear but it isn't backed up in the text.

 

[ebk2992]

I’ve cleared aircraft for the visual on initial contact from FL230. All that happened was they landed safely.

Did they say they had the airport in sight?

 

[ebk2992]

Well the .65Z CHG 2 clears up one of my questions. At airports with a currently-operational ATCT, you issue an approach clearance to a specific runway. At non-towered airports, you issue an approach clearance to the airport only. So it is written, and so it shall be done.

I still contend that the grammatical mess which is 7–4–3a technically does not require the pilot to report the field in sight, provided they are #1 and provided that they were being vectored for a visual approach in the first place. Again, I don't think that's the intended meaning but I do think that's what the text says.

clear the a/c for the visual on initial contact at 15,000 and see what happens. time to put your money where your mouth is