ILS before visual?

[Romano Lara]

I was watching this AA video I found on YouTube - link at the bottom of my post. It's AAL001 from JFK to LAX. One instance during their approach phase I heard SoCal approach gave them clearance for the ILS 24L and then shortly cleared them visual 24L after the traffic pointouts. I've never seen this anywhere in the .65 or I missed something, but can someone clarify if it's possible or "okay" to clear them for the ILS and the visuals later?

thanks!

Link to the video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cijc5AUmwZY

At 06:50 you can hear SoCal app giving them clearance for the ILS24L at this certain fix. Then at 07:24 after the traffic pointout, Socal app then gave them clearance for the visual.

[Daniel Hawton]

I was watching this AA video I found on YouTube - link at the bottom of my post. It's AAL001 from JFK to LAX. One instance during their approach phase I heard SoCal approach gave them clearance for the ILS 24L and then shortly cleared them visual 24L after the traffic pointouts. I've never seen this anywhere in the .65 or I missed something, but can someone clarify if it's possible or "okay" to clear them for the ILS and the visuals later?

thanks!

Link to the video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cijc5AUmwZY

At 06:50 you can hear SoCal app giving them clearance for the ILS24L at this certain fix. Then at 07:24 after the traffic pointout, Socal app then gave them clearance for the visual.

It's not disallowed under chapter 7 of the 7110.65, and I haven't read it being disallowed anywhere else.

[Romano Lara]

Thank you Daniel. I just don't get the logic of clearing them for the ILS and the visual when they're already on the ILS.

Can you sight in one instance when it can be useful? Thanks again.

RL

[Scott DeWoody]

Romano, good question, my only opinion as to why is 1) the controller forgot (been there), and 2) clearing the pilot originally for the ILS approach allows the pilot to capture the localizer, then seeing that the pilot is on the localizer, maybe giving the visual clearance just frees up the pilot to bring himself in the rest of the way visually.  

Maybe I'm way off base, but those are the only two things that pop into my mind.

[Mike Cassel]

Thank you Daniel. I just don't get the logic of clearing them for the ILS and the visual when they're already on the ILS.

Can you sight in one instance when it can be useful? Thanks again.

RL

Yes. At LAX in real life, parallel approach monitor positions have to be staffed if aircraft are simultaneously using the ILS approaches. That staffing isn't required if either aircraft is on a visual, so on a nice day or when they don't have the staffing, it can be very convenient to clear someone for the ILS on the RIIVR/SEAVU/OLDEE arrivals and then change them to a visual.

Another time it can be useful is when an airport has a particularly nasty missed approach procedure or other protection requirements, that might conflict with other aircraft. An example that comes to mind is the KSMO VOR-A Approach, which has protection area requirements that can conflict with LAX. When an aircraft changes from the VOR-A to a visual, it frees up airspace to be used by other aircraft.

[Dhruv Kalra]

The other thing about a visual approach is that it takes separation responsibility off the controller and places it upon the pilot. Reading between the lines this typically results in a tighter packed final since pilots aren't held to 3 miles/1000 feet when using visual sep.

[Andrew Doubleday]

The other thing about a visual approach is that it takes separation responsibility off the controller and places it upon the pilot. Reading between the lines this typically results in a tighter packed final since pilots aren't held to 3 miles/1000 feet when using visual sep.

^^^This. Seen it done at ORD a number of times for this reason alone.

[Daniel Hawton]

Thank you Daniel. I just don't get the logic of clearing them for the ILS and the visual when they're already on the ILS.

Can you sight in one instance when it can be useful? Thanks again.

RL

Another reason is if the pilot fails to capture the localizer but has at some point reported the field in sight, instead of vectoring them back to the localizer (required), they could clear them for the visual approach and let the pilot figure out their own way down and as others say, takes separation off of the controller's shoulders and places it on the pilot (though you still have to, to an extent ensure separation or at least information of other traffic on parallel approaches).

[Ira Robinson]

The other thing about a visual approach is that it takes separation responsibility off the controller and places it upon the pilot. Reading between the lines this typically results in a tighter packed final since pilots aren't held to 3 miles/1000 feet when using visual sep.

+1.  We see this in NY all the time during busy ops at JFK and especially LGA.