Hi there to allI have a very strange problem that just started a few days ago. I was landing in phx and I noticed I was assigned visual runways 26, now in real life and in the past that Ive been assigned rw26 its an ils runway. So then I also noticed that it wasnt just me that it was giving the visual runway to, it was giving it to all of my ai traffic as well. I have no idea of why this is happening or how it got to be like this. I havent changed anything regarding the atc, all I have done is updated a few airlines flightplans but that is it. This also isnt just happening at only phx, it is happening in other places too.Heres some basic comp info.Vista Home premium SP2FSX sp2UTX, GEX, REXThanks for the help

Yeah..... if the weather is good you should expect the visual approach, unless you request something different. At least that's how we operate in the real world....

Yeah..... if the weather is good you should expect the visual approach, unless you request something different. At least that's how we operate in the real world....

Yeah-I almost always get the expect the visual approach rw-got to be pretty nasty conditions not to. Ryan can correct me if wrong-but it is in the best interests of everyone to get a visual approach. If they can get you to a point where you can go visual-they don't have to hold other aircraft off the approach until you are done. Now a question-if you are on an ifr flight plan and assigned a visual approach does that count as an approach?

Yes I forgot to mention that. Im on a ifr flight plan. And it gives me the visual. Which isnt right to my knowledge.

Yes I forgot to mention that. Im on a ifr flight plan. And it gives me the visual. Which isnt right to my knowledge.

No it is right. As I explained above-it is in everyone's interest to have a visual approach on an ifr plan if conditions warrant it so other aircraft don't have to be held off until you complete a full approach.e.g. let's say you are doing an approach to an uncontrolled airport. If the controller can get you into visual conditions (determined by minimum vectoring altitude) he can at that point clear you for the visual approach and have you maintain visual separation from other aircraft, and not have to fly the full approach.If you can't do that-he can't allow any other aircraft to start the approach until you have flown the full approach, landed, and cancelled your ifr either by the air before landing or by phone. If conditions are below vfr-you have to cancel on the ground. In the meantime things get stacked up.. Same works at major airports-faster is better...and if wrong Ryan can correct or clarify as he is a real controller ..

No it is right. As I explained above-it is in everyone's interest to have a visual approach on an ifr plan if conditions warrant it so other aircraft don't have to be held off until you complete a full approach.e.g. let's say you are doing an approach to an uncontrolled airport. If the controller can get you into visual conditions (determined by minimum vectoring altitude) he can at that point clear you for the visual approach and have you maintain visual separation from other aircraft, and not have to fly the full approach.If you can't do that-he can't allow any other aircraft to start the approach until you have flown the full approach, landed, and cancelled your ifr either by the air before landing or by phone. If conditions are below vfr-you have to cancel on the ground. In the meantime things get stacked up.. Same works at major airports-faster is better...and if wrong Ryan can correct or clarify as he is a real controller ..

Yeah that's the jist of it :)At Duluth we do A LOT of visual approaches, that way the pilot can fly right at a point, maybe a 2-3 mile base/final, or even at the numbers if we need them to go fast :) In poor weather (ceiling has to be 1900 or better in DLH) we have to run instrument approaches (field elevation 1428). The other part (pilots maintain visual separation from each other) is a whole different part, and actually we don't need that for visual approaches. I still apply basic separation between targets, so I can run 10 guys on a visual as long as I have my required miles between them or 1000ft vertical WITHOUT the pilots seeing each other. At Class B/C airports they run visuals a lot too but the everything is more structured than our class D/E. For instance the approach controller will vector guys on a downwind (not traffic pattern downwind, but RADAR pattern, usually 7k-12k ft depending on field elevation- big commercial airliners Im talking about.) and turn them onto a base where the pilot can easily see the field and where they won't conflict with other traffic....ie so pilots aren't cutting each other off on the base turn etc.... And they also use speed control, something we at DLH rarely use....At uncontrolled fields what Geof says is mostly correct as well. You can actually have two on an approach but they need the basic IFR separation criteria applied, be it 3, 4, 5, 6, 10 miles (A380 is a "Super" now, small aircraft follow 10 miles in trail on approach ick) OR 1000 feet vertical. If the pilot can get the field in sight AND cancel IFR then we can let the other guy go into the airport, or depart the airport, since they'll talk to each other on unicom/ctaf

Yeah that's the jist of it :)At Duluth we do A LOT of visual approaches, that way the pilot can fly right at a point, maybe a 2-3 mile base/final, or even at the numbers if we need them to go fast :) In poor weather (ceiling has to be 1900 or better in DLH) we have to run instrument approaches (field elevation 1428). The other part (pilots maintain visual separation from each other) is a whole different part, and actually we don't need that for visual approaches. I still apply basic separation between targets, so I can run 10 guys on a visual as long as I have my required miles between them or 1000ft vertical WITHOUT the pilots seeing each other. At Class B/C airports they run visuals a lot too but the everything is more structured than our class D/E. For instance the approach controller will vector guys on a downwind (not traffic pattern downwind, but RADAR pattern, usually 7k-12k ft depending on field elevation- big commercial airliners Im talking about.) and turn them onto a base where the pilot can easily see the field and where they won't conflict with other traffic....ie so pilots aren't cutting each other off on the base turn etc.... And they also use speed control, something we at DLH rarely use....At uncontrolled fields what Geof says is mostly correct as well. You can actually have two on an approach but they need the basic IFR separation criteria applied, be it 3, 4, 5, 6, 10 miles (A380 is a "Super" now, small aircraft follow 10 miles in trail on approach ick) OR 1000 feet vertical. If the pilot can get the field in sight AND cancel IFR then we can let the other guy go into the airport, or depart the airport, since they'll talk to each other on unicom/ctaf

Great info Geof and Ryan.As I use Radar Contact often when flying IFR, and land at smaller uncontrolled airports quite often, I think I'll start utilizing the 'visual' option more often when I have an uncontrolled airport in sight, instead of 'allowing' ATC to vectored me to final, or requesting/selecting a terminal procedure. I've been wondering about this, and you have both answered some of my questions. One question: When you announce you have the airport in sight, is your IFR plan canceled by the controller at the same time? Or do you still have to cancel it separately? (I hope I'm asking that correctly).

I hope my answer makes sense lolIf I had a pilot performing an instrument approach and then they said they had the airport in sight, I would require them to state "I'll cancel IFR"

Alright thanks guys, Ill have to give it a few more days and get in some iffy weather and check it out. I just reported it because when I fly ifr in the sim it always no matter what the weather is has given me an ils runway. So I raised my eye brow at it.

Great info Geof and Ryan.As I use Radar Contact often when flying IFR, and land at smaller uncontrolled airports quite often, I think I'll start utilizing the 'visual' option more often when I have an uncontrolled airport in sight, instead of 'allowing' ATC to vectored me to final, or requesting/selecting a terminal procedure. I've been wondering about this, and you have both answered some of my questions. One question: When you announce you have the airport in sight, is your IFR plan canceled by the controller at the same time? Or do you still have to cancel it separately? (I hope I'm asking that correctly).

The pilot cancels the ifr plan. You also don't have to accept the visual. I had one a few months ago where the controller vectored me straight to the airport expecting by reported weather conditions for me to do the visual-however I was still in the clouds when he cleared me for the visual. I reported this to him and asked for a vector to the gps approach. Once starting the approach, I broke out about 400 ft. lower, and then reported I had the airport-at that point I was cleared again for the visual. However, I did not cancel my ifr until I was a couple miles out as I still wanted the radar separation. If a controller reports no traffic I will usual cancel at that point. If you wanted you can wait to cancel on the ground-but again it frees up the system if you can in the air. Which again leads me to ask my question. I have never logged visual approaches as an approach, but a cfi told me his opinion is since they are an approach in the ifr system you should. I am not sure-wonder if someone here has another opinion.

No it is right. As I explained above-it is in everyone's interest to have a visual approach on an ifr plan if conditions warrant it so other aircraft don't have to be held off until you complete a full approach.e.g. let's say you are doing an approach to an uncontrolled airport. If the controller can get you into visual conditions (determined by minimum vectoring altitude) he can at that point clear you for the visual approach and have you maintain visual separation from other aircraft, and not have to fly the full approach.If you can't do that-he can't allow any other aircraft to start the approach until you have flown the full approach, landed, and cancelled your ifr either by the air before landing or by phone. If conditions are below vfr-you have to cancel on the ground. In the meantime things get stacked up.. Same works at major airports-faster is better...and if wrong Ryan can correct or clarify as he is a real controller ..

Geof, your forgetting this is FS. If you are on an IFR flightplan in FS, and the airport has ILS runways you should always get a ils approach, regardless of whether your in VFR conditions. (At least I always do) The only time you would get a visual is if no ILS runway was available. In KPHX there should be.

The pilot cancels the ifr plan. You also don't have to accept the visual. I had one a few months ago where the controller vectored me straight to the airport expecting by reported weather conditions for me to do the visual-however I was still in the clouds when he cleared me for the visual. Which again leads me to ask my question. I have never logged visual approaches as an approach, but a cfi told me his opinion is since they are an approach in the ifr system you should. I am not sure-wonder if someone here has another opinion.

WOW! He should of asked if you had the field in sight. I have no idea about logging, I'm not instrument rated (someday maybe), but from a controller standpoint, a visual approach would be an approach.

Geof, your forgetting this is FS. If you are on an IFR flightplan in FS, and the airport has ILS runways you should always get a ils approach, regardless of whether your in VFR conditions. (At least I always do) The only time you would get a visual is if no ILS runway was available. In KPHX there should be.

Are you sure fs doesn't take the ceiling into account (I don't know cause I don't use atc)? I know some were stunned to find fs logs ifr time in the logbook correctly by measuring the time you are in the clouds and not on an ifr flight plan.

..........Which again leads me to ask my question. I have never logged visual approaches as an approach, but a cfi told me his opinion is since they are an approach in the ifr system you should. I am not sure-wonder if someone here has another opinion.

Hi Geof,An interesting question- I have always considered the visual an "approach" since you are still on an IFR flight plan. Of course the visual is conditional upon having the airport or preceding aircraft in sight. I have never had to do a missed from a visual, but this is my biggest concern- until you get instructions, what do you do? Sometimes maintaining r/w heading until vectors are received is not the best and safe option. Bruce.

Are you sure fs doesn't take the ceiling into account (I don't know cause I don't use atc)? I know some were stunned to find fs logs ifr time in the logbook correctly by measuring the time you are in the clouds and not on an ifr flight plan.

Yes in FS even if you are in clear sky's you'll get an ILS approach from ATC, if one's available.I think he needs to check if some how an AFCAD (ADE, AFX or other) scenery was installed that removed the ILS approaches in KPHX.