This did come to my mind now LEXUS WPT
How does one go about going missed on VPT, say when flying LOC17 followed by VPT35 then losing ground in sight at LEXUS?
Few details on VPT ‘prescribed track’ versus CTL ‘circling to land’:
- VPT require ground in-sight and following specific track while circling CTL which require runway elements in sight
- VPT require to follow prescribed track while in CTL one can evolve anywhere in the circling protected area
Should one,
- Keep flying prescribed track (by dead reckoning) while climbing until they cross LOC17 missed flight path?
- Tighten toward the runway (without necessarily seeing it) to resume LOC17 missed flight path?
- Descend toward ground at LEXUS?
VPT protected area is described in DGAC MUP while CTL follows PANS-OPS/TERPS
If you don’t have 2000ft ceiling, they use the circling in force at circling minima of the RNP35 for LOCB (between 900 and 1100 depending on the approach).
If you go missed on the VPT, follow the track while keeping 2000ft, overhead RW17 then approach vectors you to another approach or you alternate.
From a user point of view, this case is very rare (RNP35 + circling), and most of time when conditions are crap, winds comes from east/north east and you can land on R35, and you will stay over the see for the final, taking care not to be pushed by the wind over the esterel mountains on you left.
Thanks for the details, sorry it’s LUXUS (my auto-correct wanted a LEXUS car)
greg_mp wrote:
If you go missed on the VPT, follow the track while keeping 2000ft
That would be interesting if the reason of going missed is because you did went into clouds during VPT 
on circling, it’s not an issue as you can keep the turn tight toward runway while you sort yourself out with regrading to height
In Cannes, there is lot of room around VPT path when it comes to terrain, while ago I have done VPT at Annecy in good weather, the wife kept nagging to look away from runway (which was difficult to see near horizon at VPT distance & height) and concentrate on my right side where the wing was kissing the trees of the mountain, if one goes to clouds on downwind, I think going toward the runway as in the CTL is more sensible than keeping along the VPT prescribed track? even if that means overlying the city which is reason why VPT is there in 1st place?
Surrounding cities is the reason of the VPT (as well as the 7% final), and I doubt you will make it if ceiling goes under 2500ft.
I have done the VPT on a slow PA28 and busted the blue circle of “La Roquette sur Siagne” by 5 meters (which is only visible on the VAC, not on the IAC) and my club got an email about this.
" Of course, please disregard this email if the drifted flight path was due to weather or ATC : these are given full priority over environmental procedures.
Therefore, please find just below the flight path of F-XXXX on the 07/11/2021 : it appears that the aircraft drifted off course.
When approaching on VPT 17, keep in mind that overflying the point A is mandatory in order to avoid the sensitive inner area of La Roquette sur Siagne. The visual reference point to find the point A is the NW/SE axis motorway: aircraft should fly along on the SW side of the motorway."
Remember why a VPT is there ie to land on the reciprocal when there is only one IAP.
It is a visual manouver prescribed to avoid hot spots, noise abatement problems etc.
So as soon as you go into cloud you are no longer visual and therefore you have to go missed.
The missed is of course the missed approach procedure for the IAP.
So you fly to the runway and pick up the missed approach procedure from there and you fly the missed for the procedure.
It could be, however that ATC might vector you to a different point in order to pick up the missed approach. Avoiding towns for noise abatement reasons or other such restricted areas need not be taken into account as you are carrying out the manouver for safety reasons ie loss of visual references.
I should also add that the VPT plate may aldo carry different instructions, in which case these should be followed.
I have just noticed the VPT at LFMD goes against the norm and makes a missed approach for the VPT runway ie 17.instead of 35 one would need to be very careful of your altitudes there.
gallois wrote:
I have just noticed the VPT at LFMD goes against the norm and makes a missed approach for the VPT runway ie 17.instead of 35 one would need to be very careful of your altitudes there.
VPT-A is based on LOC-A and RNP-A, the -A refers to it as being designed as cloud-break you fly IFR until MAPT at 2000ft before switching VFR (it is not designed as instrument approach where you fly IFR all the way until ground to land on an instrument runway as per ICAO Annex14)
It fall under the norm, not sure why you you say it goes against the norm? the missed on VPT-A is consistent with missed from RNP-A though, in both you will fly 170 heading? anyway, it will be daft to fly north with 350 on the compass
If you take eg Brest, for the VPT you descend to 750’ and don’t yet have visual reference so you go missed and AIUI the missed will be the one for the 25. If you start the VPT and lose visual you head towards the runway and turn along the runway centre line. The question is which way. Do you turn along the 07 or in the direction of the 25. AFAIU it would be the 25, as to fly 07 you run the risk of collision with anyone else descending on the 25. That’s IMO the norm.
At Cannes once over the centre line you follow the 17, but here the VPT starts much higher so you basically follow a normal VFR circuit rather than an instrument procedure. YMMV
I see, yes the IAP/VPT runways are misnamed in Cannes: you fly LOC17 followed by VPT17, in Brest, you fly ILS25 followed by VPT07
However, in both missed of VPT is same as missed of IAP? this is very standard (at least what ATC expect)
I do not worry about colliding with anyone, once you are cleared for a given approach, you are automatically cleared for its missed approach (that is why you should fly that and not something else), the missed is reserved for you while you are cooking your CTL/VPT or even a visual circuit
I thought the -A (or B) was named like this because the final approach segment is not lined up with the runway it is designed for landing. The first is A and second is B,… when they are lined up(with in 10°) they are suffixed Z, Y, X,…
Z, Y, X are used when the approach has a straight-in or offset to land, Z will have lowest minima and sits on top of navigator page (likely slow category aircraft CatA, highest climb gradient PDG, highest descent GP), the name will be the approach axis = runway axis +/- offset
A, B, C are used when only circling minima is published (designed as cloud-break with no option for straight or offset to runway), B will have lowest minima and sits on top of navigator page (likely slow category aircraft CatA, highest climb gradient PDG, highest descent GP), so it make sense to use landing runway axis not approach axis?
Without ATS in France, all approaches are ILS, RNP-A/B…even though runway has Z, Y straight-in, go figure
PS: Nice LFMN, went as far as RNP-D plus their VPT has a prescribed missed path and it can be flown solely on navigator as VPT-AR
