Circle to land questions

A long time ago I tried to learn how to do the circle to land maneuver. At that time I was using 2d panels and gave up mostly due to limited peripheral vision.

I'm now using some good payware planes with VC and I installed EZ doc for FSX. So I decided to try again. At the moment I'm flying the Majestic Q400 Pilot Edition.

This is the current procedure I am using gleaned from what I could gather from videos, postings and my own experiments for a reciprocal circle to land. I normally always keep the runway to my left to make it easier to see the runway. The following example assumes I have the runway on the left.

At about a mile or so from the runway I turn 45 degrees right for 40 seconds with the plane configured for landing - gear down and 15 degrees flaps(standard for the Q400) and then turn back to the runway heading. I fly at the altitude indicated on the approach chart for a circle to land. As I approach the opposite threshold of the runway I descend to 700 ft. When abeam of the opposite runway I continue for 1 minute then turn 90 degrees left. When I get a visual on the runway I turn left 90 degrees to line up with the runway. When I turn is based on what I see and is my best judgement. My final turn is a 30 degree bank descending at about 200 fpm. I then head for home.

Is this procedure correct ? There appear to be a number of different ways to do this landing. I'm not sure about when and what altitude to descend to. When I go to 700 ft I did it because I saw someone else do it in a video. Other than practice are there any visual cues that might help when making the final turn ? I am having trouble getting lined up properly as my turns are too early or too late. I've had a few good ones though.

I'd appreciate any comments and links to any sites that might be helpful.

A circling approach is an instrument approach mechanism that, IF ceiling and visibility allow, can let you land on a runway other than that which you are headed straight for. As such, it needs higher minima than the non-circling approach. But before you may deviate from the instrument guided approach, you must have the runway in sight and be able to visually guide yourself to the other runway without losing sight of it. If you get to the minimums (as published on the approach plate) without the runway in sight, such that you can visually land, then you must initiate the missed approach procedure. If you can initially see the runway and you start your visual deviation but then lose sight of the runway, you must initiate a missed approach.

On the approach plate, near the bottom, you'll see several approach categories (approach speed related) as follows:

Category A: Speed less than 91 knots.

Category B: Speed 91 knots or more but less than 121 knots.

Category C: Speed 121 knots or more but less than 141 knots.

Category D: Speed 141 knots or more but less than 166 knots.

Category E: Speed 166 knots or more.

From the FAA's Instrument Procedures Handbook pp 4-8, 4-9:

Page 10-20 of the FAA's Instrument Flying Handbook also talks about circling approaches.

There are links to both these manuals (and many more) on this FAA web page. There's more than you probably want to know there.

Obviously you may do as you wish in the sim, where things can be over-simplified without bad things happening, but the above lets you know what the real world situation is.

Like Larry said: You can at least PRACTICE handling the mechanical aspects of getting views you want or need with no consequences. Here is a trick I use. Press of '[' (left bracket) will open a 'New Window'. You Right Click on that window, choose 'Outside > Top Down' view. Resize and locate right corner (my choice). That 'Top Down' view will be STUCK there no matter what view you are in. Zoom in/out to locate the airport. Fly your pattern or 'circle' seeing exactly where you are. Use DME to get distance. Too easy?

Chuck B

Napamule

Edit: Oh, that 'Top Down' window will always show the ground/airport no matter what the visibility might be. ALWAYS clear weather with this 'trick'.

I never did understand the circle to land procedure. When tower told me that I was like, "huh." And ignored it and just landed on the runway I wanted and makes sense given the wind direction.

I should look into it more and practice the maneuver, but I'm not going to be a pilot any time soon based on the current FAR. One, I'm color blind. I guess there's a one shot deal of a "signals test?" And two, I have a mental health issue. So there goes that. I wrote the President a letter asking for a provision for people like me to be able to fly at least privately if the psychologist signs off on it and I can exhibit the skills necessary to operate the plane in a proficient manner. With that, I don't see why I should be precluded form flying. But it is what it is.

I never did understand the circle to land procedure. When tower told me that I was like, "huh." And ignored it and just landed on the runway I wanted and makes sense given the wind direction.

 

I should look into it more and practice the maneuver, but I'm not going to be a pilot any time soon based on the current FAR. One, I'm color blind. I guess there's a one shot deal of a "signals test?" And two, I have a mental health issue. So there goes that. I wrote the President a letter asking for a provision for people like me to be able to fly at least privately if the psychologist signs off on it and I can exhibit the skills necessary to operate the plane in a proficient manner. With that, I don't see why I should be precluded form flying. But it is what it is.

To me circle to land just looks like flying a pattern at low altitude in sight of the runway. From my reading on the subject it sounds like a good maneuver to avoid and it is not generally recommended. It's difficult and risky. Some carriers don't allow their pilots to even do the maneuver.

I'd rather take my chances with a strong tailwind. In the case of obstacles or very steep approaches I would say don't allow the obstacles to be put up and don't build runways with excessively steep approaches. I'm not sure how much time I want to spend learning a maneuver I don't think I'll use much. I don't use ATC but stick to approach charts and try to follow procedures as best I can. I just wanted to learn something new.

To me circle to land just looks like flying a pattern at low altitude in sight of the runway. From my reading on the subject it sounds like a good maneuver to avoid and it is not generally recommended. It's difficult and risky. Some carriers don't allow their pilots to even do the maneuver.

To a degree, that's exactly what it is, starting from where you'd otherwise do a missed approach, and with the chance (in many cases) of losing sight of the airport while you are maneuvering, which is why faster aircraft have a higher ceiling requirement and a larger diameter "allowed" radius (think higher visibility -- see the manuals I mentioned earlier).

I'd rather take my chances with a strong tailwind. In the case of obstacles or very steep approaches I would say don't allow the obstacles to be put up and don't build runways with excessively steep approaches. I'm not sure how much time I want to spend learning a maneuver I don't think I'll use much. I don't use ATC but stick to approach charts and try to follow procedures as best I can. I just wanted to learn something new.

That's only slightly better, and in many cases worse, since your groundspeed landing with an appreciable tailwind will be very high, giving you not only less runway available (you'll touch down longer), but a faster speed to dissipate in that shorter runway segment. Worse, though, certain kinds of gusts can potentially throw you out of control, and you'll have NO rudder control on the ground when you get to slower speeds (wind is behind you). Some of those gusts might even flop you on your back or flip a wing up and over (it has happened).

So a go-around is MUCH better if you have problems with the approach, and if you don't do circling then there's no point in even starting the approach since, by definition, the landing won't be on the runway you're pointed at.

So do as you like in the sim, but don't think about the real world that way -- it's not conducive to longevity.

Napamule

Edit: Oh, that 'Top Down' window will always show the ground/airport no matter what the visibility might be. ALWAYS clear weather with this 'trick'.

A nice sim aid. But I've found that with TrackIR I rarely need such workarounds, since it's infinitely easier to orient yourself and see what's around you. Plus, for me it feels more natural than worrying about hat switches, view changes, etc. -- I just move my head and lean forward/back left/right, stretch up or scrunch down, similar to what I do in real flight.

Caveat: A friend who has more than 20 years experience with the sims, and over 10,000 hours of real flight time, including lots of years instructing, charter flying, and more, has been unable to get used to the TrackIR, but he uses spot view, flyby view, overhead view, as well as cockpit view to do a marvelous job in the sim. Flying formation with him, no matter which of us leads, is a precision operation.

Depending on how “realistic” you want to be. There are several restrictions on visual circling. Such as distance from the threshold one can circle etc. for Cat C, it’s 4.2nm (measure 4.2nm from both thresholds and draw an arc, that becomes the circling area). It’s NOT measured from the reference point or NAVAID. Also, many approaches have areas where no circling is permitted (terrain/obstacles etc). These are shown as shaded areas on the circling diagram.

Your procedure for joining the circling segment is reasonable. At my outfit (Cat C aircraft) we turn 60* from the centreline for 45 seconds. Then turn onto a downwind heading. Once abeam the threshold, start timing for 30seconds +-1s for each knot of head/tail wind. Before turning base. You don’t descend from your altitude till you intercept the standard descent profile. For example, if your circling at 700’, you wouldn’t start descent till about mid base. Where as if you’re circling at 1000’, you’d start descent roughly turning base. The circuit flown is fairly close in, so your time on base leg is relatively small.

clear as mud?

A long time ago I tried to learn how to do the circle to land maneuver. At that time I was using 2d panels and gave up mostly due to limited peripheral vision.

 

I'm now using some good payware planes with VC and I installed EZ doc for FSX. So I decided to try again. At the moment I'm flying the Majestic Q400 Pilot Edition.

 

This is the current procedure I am using gleaned from what I could gather from videos, postings and my own experiments for a reciprocal circle to land. I normally always keep the runway to my left to make it easier to see the runway. The following example assumes I have the runway on the left.

 

At about a mile or so from the runway I turn 45 degrees right for 40 seconds with the plane configured for landing - gear down and 15 degrees flaps(standard for the Q400) and then turn back to the runway heading. I fly at the altitude indicated on the approach chart for a circle to land. As I approach the opposite threshold of the runway I descend to 700 ft. When abeam of the opposite runway I continue for 1 minute then turn 90 degrees left. When I get a visual on the runway I turn left 90 degrees to line up with the runway. When I turn is based on what I see and is my best judgement. My final turn is a 30 degree bank descending at about 200 fpm. I then head for home.

 

Is this procedure correct ? There appear to be a number of different ways to do this landing. I'm not sure about when and what altitude to descend to. When I go to 700 ft I did it because I saw someone else do it in a video. Other than practice are there any visual cues that might help when making the final turn ? I am having trouble getting lined up properly as my turns are too early or too late. I've had a few good ones though.

 

I'd appreciate any comments and links to any sites that might be helpful.

Excellent answers here. Yes, different operators and/or pilot may fly the circling maneuver in different ways but a few aspects of the procedure are certain:

1) Do not descend below the circling MDA for your aircraft approach category until you are ready to make a final descent towards the runway

2) Do not attempt to circle for landing if visibility is less than the published circling minimum visibility.

3) Stay close enough to keep the runway in sight but far enough to safely make all the turns required.

4) Remain within the circling approach area. I think this is published as part of the PANS for regions following ICAO standards and TERPS for FAA standards. The circling area radius depends on MDA and aircraft approach category. Check out this page: https://www.skybrary.aero/index.php/Circling_Approach_-_difference_between_ICAO_PANS-OPS_and_US_TERPS

Happy flying!

Hi Folks,

Yeah - this maneuver seems to substantially increase the risk factor of a landing - been a bunch of high profile crashes using this - the last one I’m aware of is the Lear 35A into Teterboro... Low speed - maneuvering flight - close to the ground - with weather - in a high workload environment - - - makes for a pretty easy stall/spin scenario... Hey - let’s be careful out there...

https://baaa-acro.com/sites/default/files/import/uploads/2017/05/N452DA.jpg

Regards,

Scott

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Depending on how “realistic” you want to be. There are several restrictions on visual circling. Such as distance from the threshold one can circle etc. for Cat C, it’s 4.2nm (measure 4.2nm from both thresholds and draw an arc, that becomes the circling area). It’s NOT measured from the reference point or NAVAID. Also, many approaches have areas where no circling is permitted (terrain/obstacles etc). These are shown as shaded areas on the circling diagram.

 

Your procedure for joining the circling segment is reasonable. At my outfit (Cat C aircraft) we turn 60* from the centreline for 45 seconds. Then turn onto a downwind heading. Once abeam the threshold, start timing for 30seconds +-1s for each knot of head/tail wind. Before turning base. You don’t descend from your altitude till you intercept the standard descent profile. For example, if your circling at 700’, you wouldn’t start descent till about mid base. Where as if you’re circling at 1000’, you’d start descent roughly turning base. The circuit flown is fairly close in, so your time on base leg is relatively small.

 

clear as mud?

I have been experimenting and practicing more and I now am doing a pretty good job of making the final turn and getting lined up with the runway. I'm trying to follow procedures but not slavishly. I see improvement. It always comes down to practice, practice, practice.

Hi Folks,

 

Yeah - this maneuver seems to substantially increase the risk factor of a landing - been a bunch of high profile crashes using this - the last one I’m aware of is the Lear 35A into Teterboro... Low speed - maneuvering flight - close to the ground - with weather - in a high workload environment - - - makes for a pretty easy stall/spin scenario... Hey - let’s be careful out there...

 

 

https://baaa-acro.com/sites/default/files/import/uploads/2017/05/N452DA.jpg

 

 

 

Regards,

Scott

 

 

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

This is sort of a catch 22. It seems hard to be proficient without doing the maneuver with some frequency, but it's risky to practice.

...this maneuver seems to substantially increase the risk factor of a landing ...

Sorry, I have to completely disagree with that statement.

Any approach, flown improperly, is dangerous.

...the last one I’m aware of is the Lear 35A into Teterboro...

In regards to the KTEB accident, which is more risky, a properly flown circular approach or a straight in approach to a shorter runway with less favorable winds?

Yes, that crash made the headlines. What hasn't made the headlines is the 1000s of times that circling approach has been successfully flown.

Had the pilots not lost situational awareness, or had they headed the warnings from the controllers, the crash would probably not of happened.

For those not familiar with the incident, they overshot a turning point which made them have to make sharp turns close to the airport.

So yes, pilot workload on a circling approach is a bit different than on a straight in approach.

However, if it is beyond the capabilities of the pilot to fly a circling approach, they are not someone I would want to ride with on any flight requiring instument flying.

peace,

the Bean

Sorry, I have to completely disagree with that statement.

 

Any approach, flown improperly, is dangerous.

 

 

 

In regards to the KTEB accident, which is more risky, a properly flown circular approach or a straight in approach to a shorter runway with less favorable winds?

 

Yes, that crash made the headlines. What hasn't made the headlines is the 1000s of times that circling approach has been successfully flown.

 

Had the pilots not lost situational awareness, or had they headed the warnings from the controllers, the crash would probably not of happened.

 

For those not familiar with the incident, they overshot a turning point which made them have to make sharp turns close to the airport.

 

So yes, pilot workload on a circling approach is a bit different than on a straight in approach.

 

However, if it is beyond the capabilities of the pilot to fly a circling approach, they are not someone I would want to ride with on any flight requiring instument flying.

 

peace,

the Bean

Hi Bean,

Been a while - hope all is well...

Yeah - I hear ya...

My only assertion is that with greater difficulty - comes more risk - I don't think that's really an arguable point ?

RW aviation is all about risk management - in addition to all your normal landing risk factors - you're adding in higher stall speeds, low altitude maneuvering flight, and searching for visual clues on top of an already heavy workload... It's more difficult than a straight in approach...

Flying high performance aircraft is another risk factor that seems to contribute to a circle to land approach mishaps - as they are more prone to stall/spin while maneuvering slowly - and they are more difficult to recover from said event... Had they been flying a Piper Cherokee - this also would most likely not have happened...

There have been numerous high profile circle to land crashes - where the circle to land was a contributing factor - I believe the Microsoft exec crash in CT was similar - IIRC... While my opinion is purely anecdotal - I'm sure a circle to land approach has far more stall/spin mishaps than a straight in...

Yank'n and bank'n a Lear at less than a 1000 feet is never really a good idea...

No matter what our skill level or experience - we're not infallible - and - some approaches are certainly more forgiving than others... Had the pilot not been in a steep bank - almost certainly - he would not have had stall/spin on approach... While the NTSB final report hasn't been released yet - I'd put money on the approach being a contributing factor...

Here's a synopsis of the approach in question by someone who's flown it many times:

It's pretty tricky there, you see IFR arrivals are given the ILS to Rnwy 06, with circle to land on Rnwy 01 when winds are Northerly. The close proximity to KEWR forces this type of arrival, and there is no approach to Rnwy 01 as that would cause you to overfly the other airport (or nearly so). if you look at the ILS to 06, you can't start the circle till passing Torby NDB (tower and approach control requirement), probably to avoid KEWR as much as possible or perhaps noise abatement. You're at 760' during the circle and you must circle to the right which places you between a group of towers, two being only about 100 feet below you and over the Meadowlands football stadium at mid field. You will lose sight of most of the airport, and after passing the stadium, you really have to bank hard to the left and pick up the approach end of Rnwy 01 in the turn, while descending because the approach end is offset to the south by about 3,000' when compared to Rnwy 06. All this said, if you have the wind strongly from the left (as it was today) your chance of overshooting final is really high, and your base to final is only about 1nm out. Since most jets circle at about 150-160 knots, this one maneuver really requires you have your "A" game on!!!!

Regards,

Scott

Hi Folks,

Just to be clear - I'm not saying they shouldn't be used or should be banned - but as PIC you have to realize flying them adds to your risk factor...

Regards,

Scott

Circle to land approaches are risky. No doubt about that. A skilled pilot who understand his aircraft and is situationally aware can execute it safely.

However, there will always be a significant element of risk with these approaches particularly in areas having low visibility and high terrain. There are some operators that prohibit their pilots from circling to land as part of their standard operating procedures.

I’m going to explain a scenario where I might consider a circle to land.

I’m flying in to an airport that has an ILS to a southerly runway only. Winds are strong and out of the north, which means I have a tailwind all the way down to the southerly runway. I’m heavy, fast and the runway is wet. Due to some luck, I break out underneath the ceiling and can level off at the circling MDA. Visibility is fairly greater than the published minimum for circling and the circling radius is large enough for my aircraft. The AIPs allow for circling and ATC authorizes it so I go ahead and do it.. because otherwise a high landing speed on a short, wet runway with a strong tailwind can result in a call to the insurance company or worse..

So what I mean to say is don’t do it unless absolutely necessary.

Please correct me if I’m wrong here..

Hi Rohan,

Yep - seems like sage advice to me...

Hi Folks,

One last thing on Teterboro (as it just happens to be the one I've read the most on) and to bring this back to then sim world - is we have all the tools to recreate said flight first hand - so you can see what's involved - the FSW Lear 35 is an extremely well done model - one of my absolute favorites of all time in FS (pick it up on one of their $20.00 sales as it's a steal) - we have DRZ's Teterboro - HiFi's historical weather should recreate the winds (very windy that day) - and most of the pertinent landmarks like the stadium are in the sim... It certainly provides some unique insights into flying the approach the general public wouldn't get...

Flysimware Lear 35A (my custom paint with a hand painted flag in vector graphics)

Regards,

Scott

I took a look at the approach chart for the ILS runway 06 at KTEB.. and didn't feel too good about breaking out to land on runway 01 at about TORBY.

So the question here is.. would you deal with a direct gusty 15 knot crosswind for runway 06 or swing it right and left to get into runway 01 at KTEB? My answer is that my decision depends on the type of aircraft, approach speed, it's crosswind limit and runway condition.

On a side note, I think the investigation into this incident is still going on? There's some news in the media that the F/O was not even supposed/allowed to be the PF on this flight..

Hi Rohan,

Since Teterboro is a controlled field - you really don’t get a choice on which runway you want to land on - the tower is going to tell you where to land... Was it only a 15 knot crosswind that day ? That doesn’t sound too bad (I’ve landed a C172 with gust over 20 with a direct crosswind) but into the wind makes it much easier so I’m sure that’s why the tower switched...

As Bean mentioned many thousands of safe landings over many years have been conducted without incident - so it’s safe to perform this landing - but all it takes is a moments inattention or distraction as one of the links of the accident chain to create a mishap... Perhaps they got complacent - perhaps they were discussing the weekend - perhaps they weren’t well rested - perhaps there was some other distraction in the cockpit - at this point we don’t know... As PIC you should be able to recognize that a more difficult approach contains more risk - so you know to be on your “A Game” while flying it...

My assumption - the winds plus the approach just worked together to defeat the pilot - a hard bank to correct for an overshoot - drastically raises the stall speed - and the pilot just lost track of his airspeed... A stall with a high bank angle bites hard and could easily develop into a spin... There’s video footage of the impact and the Lear was nose down almost completely vertical - classic stall/spin scenario...

Just like this:

https://youtu.be/jrngajyaPx4

Regards,

Scott

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Since Teterboro is a controlled field - you really don’t get a choice on which runway you want to land on - the tower is going to tell you where to land...

Actually, you can still ask for a different runway at a controlled field, though traffic might preclude them from granting your request.

I’ve landed a C172 with gust over 20 with a direct crosswind

I've done that in Cessnas, Cubs and more, but it does take considerable attention -- no daydreaming -- and good technique, including no room for slop in aircraft handling.

In a nutshell, about circling to land, it has less margin for error than a normal landing approach, since it is done at a lower altitude and usually with poor visibility, and that means a pilot is more likely to make a mistake, but given proper attention and care from the pilot, AND a willingness to go around if he loses sight of the airport, these approaches have certainly been a useful way to get in to a field over the years, and safety must not be TOO much of a problem since the FAA still allows/publishes these approaches.

BUT, that reduced margin for error does mean the approach is somewhat more hazardous than other types. HOW hazardous, depends on the exact set of circumstances, including aircraft type, weather, pilot proficiency and mental sharpness at the moment, and other factors.

Actually, you can still ask for a different runway at a controlled field, though traffic might preclude them from granting your request.

Hi Larry,

Concur - I've done it as well... I kind of meant that in the context of Teterboro - I should have been more clear... Teterboro - home of the massive Conga Line - both into and out of - the airport... They're not known to be the most accommodating airport in the world but they do have traffic volumes unheard of at most other Delta's...

Here's an amusing video by a Corporate Pilot - he did a nice job but it also seems to cast Teterboro in less than a flattering light... LOL - frustration probably drove him to produce the video...

Regards,

Scott

Hi Rohan,

 

Since Teterboro is a controlled field - you really don’t get a choice on which runway you want to land on - the tower is going to tell you where to land... Was it only a 15 knot crosswind that day ? That doesn’t sound too bad (I’ve landed a C172 with gust over 20 with a direct crosswind) but into the wind makes it much easier so I’m sure that’s why the tower switched...

Correct, Scott. In a Lear, I'd feel comfy dealing with a 15 knot crosswind instead of sharp turns at low altitude in landing configuration.

In small Cessna, I'd take advantage of it's maneuverability and opt to circle to land. A direct 15 knot crosswind with 32 knot gusts to be dealt with a small Cessna is harrowing for me. But that's just me being me. :-)

My assumption - the winds plus the approach just worked together to defeat the pilot - a hard bank to correct for an overshoot - drastically raises the stall speed - and the pilot just lost track of his airspeed... A stall with a high bank angle bites hard and could easily develop into a spin... There’s video footage of the impact and the Lear was nose down almost completely vertical - classic stall/spin scenario...

Sounds like that, yes. The F/O was not yet qualified to be the PF on the flight. He handed off controls to the Capt. when things were starting to get out of hand. Looks like they failed to gain airspeed and stalled. Some reports suggest the Captain's voice in the last 1 minute sounded very strained. Sounds of strained breathing were also reported.

Check out this report. I haven't read it in detail yet but prima-facie looks to be an in depth report that has the little details simmers and real pilots would like to know.

https://www.flyingmag.com/teterboro-learjet-crash-raises-questions-about-crew-qualifications